CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY

Transcription

1 FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2004 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY Submitted by: CPS Human Resource Services 241 Lathrop Way Sacramento, CA (Fax)

2 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary... 5 II. Introduction III. Study Background A. Phase One B. Phase Two C. Classification and Compensation System Components Classification Plan...19 a. Grouping Similar Jobs b. Classification Review Process c. Classification Descriptions vs Position Descriptions Internal Equity Labor Market Competitiveness Compensation Plan...21 IV. Study Methodology A. Classification Review Analysis of Current Classification Specifications Position Description Questionnaires Employee & Management Orientation Meetings Employee & Management Interviews Analysis of Classification Concepts...24 B. Internal Equity Assessing Internal Alignment of Jobs Point Factor Evaluation

3 3. Multiple Rater Approach Determine Point Factor Ranges C. Labor Market Survey Phase 1 Survey Phase 2 Survey D. Compensation Plan E. Knowledge Transfer/Training V. Findings & Recommendations A. Classification Plan Classification Plan Findings Classification Plan Recommendations...35 B. Internal Equity Internal Equity Findings Internal Equity Recommendations...42 C. Labor Market Survey Labor Market Findings Labor Market Recommendations...49 D. Compensation Plan Compensation Plan Findings Compensation Plan Recommendations...55 VI. Recommended Approach for Implementation Appendices Appendix A: Position Appraisal Method Appendix B: Employers Surveyed for Phase Appendix C: Employers Surveyed for Phase

4 Appendix D: Management & Non-represented Listing of Proposed Classification Title Changes Appendix E: Proposed Occupational Index, Management & Nonrepresented Classes Appendix F: Glossary of Terms/Classification Terms Appendix G: Internal Equity Point Bands Appendix H: Phase 1 Labor Market Survey Summary Appendix I: Phase 2 Labor Market Survey Summary Appendix J: Base Pay Plan, Option Appendix K: Base Pay Plan, Option

5 Charts, Tables and Figures Chart 1: Summary of Consultant s Methodology Table 1: Phase 1 Classification Description Quality Table 2: Overview of Classification Changes Table 3: Point Band Ranges Table 4: Salary Increases Reported by Washington State Local Governments Table 5: Pierce County Current Pay Grids and Pay Ranges Table 6: Pay Plan Option 1 Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Existing Pierce County Administrative Support Titles Limitations to Broad Classifications Survey Results Definitions Illustrative Example of Progression with Performance Illustrative Example of Possible Progression with Performance and Position in Grade Concept 4

6 Executive Summary Modern classification and compensation systems consist of four basic elements: 1) the classification plan; 2) the compensation plan; 3) an internal equity method for linking the plans; and 4) labor market data for gauging an organization s relative competitiveness with respect to the labor market. These four elements are the foundation upon which the fundamental personnel policies of fairness and consistency are established. They are how agencies put into practice the principle of equal pay for equal work. A county-wide performance audit in 1998 described Pierce County s classification and compensation structure as outdated and cumbersome. 1 In early 2002, before revising the classification and compensation plan, the County sought the expertise and objectivity of external consultants experienced in public sector human resources practices. CPS, Human Resource Services (CPS) was selected to conduct a comprehensive review of the classification and compensation plans. The stated objectives of the comprehensive review were to: Review internal and external salary equity based on market data; Conduct a salary market study; and Make recommendations on salaries, classifications, and related issues. The project was divided into two phases with Phase 1 including 106 classes (5 of which are elected,) with198 executive/managerial, elected, and non-represented Sheriff and legal positions. Phase 2 focused on the remaining 1,030 non-represented positions in 344 professional, maintenance/trades, and general classes. Represented positions were not included in the study. The project scope included evaluating the currency and completeness of classification descriptions; assessing the internal equity of the classifications; gauging the external competitiveness of the County s management and non-represented pay scales; and the administrative efficiency of the pay structure (E, W, N, R, K, C and G pay grids, 125 pay ranges covering the studied classes.) KPMG County-wide Performance Audit,

7 CPS analyzed incumbent duties and responsibilities through the collection and analysis of position description questionnaires, existing class descriptions and interviews with 50% of the position incumbents. Next, CPS applied a point factor approach to the classifications to reestablish an internal equity system for management and non-represented classifications. The project included a custom labor market survey for each of the study phases, supplemented by commercial private and public sector surveys. The examination and analysis of the current positions, the internal equity and pay structure, and the market data resulted in the development of classification and compensation plan recommendations for improvement. As the findings include a variety of alternatives, Pierce County plans to examine the options presented to determine the best course to proceed. The consultant s findings and recommendations provide direction on changes that will enhance the classification plan, internal equity process, pay plan structure, and external alignment vis-à-vis relevant labor markets. Study Findings and Recommendations The findings are specific to the following four categories Classification Plan, Internal Equity, Labor Market and Compensation Plan. A. Classification Plan The County last conducted a comprehensive review in Since that time there have been significant changes in services, technology, operations and organization. The concepts suited to the 80 s no longer meet the required operational competitiveness and evolving working culture, resources and government service standards of the 21 st century. Finding A.1: The management and non-represented classification plan, as a whole, no longer adequately and consistently reflects the work assigned and manner by which work is organized in Pierce County. By collecting details of duties and responsibilities assigned to County employees through the position description questionnaires, CPS analyzed work content not only to the existing class descriptions but also across departments and functions. CPS found instances of jobs with essentially similar functions classified in different titles. In other instances CPS found jobs with 6

8 the same classifications performing functions of different complexity and difficulty. Some classifications only distinguished the incumbent s time in grade rather than job content. The impact of the County not having conducted more frequent comprehensive reviews of the classification plan is that the County may be overpaying or underpaying its workforce relative to their duties and responsibilities, as well as the labor market. Finding A.2: Although the County has adopted broad classification concepts in some occupational areas, the County still has many classifications with narrow distinctions. Since narrow classifications are typically related to narrow compensation ranges, the classification system is often used to resolve other management issues such as compensation constraints and/or performance reward. For instance, a particular department may have an outstanding employee who is maxed out in the current pay grade. One resulting action is often a slight change of work scope resulting in a new classification and a higher pay grade. Because the concepts and work distinctions are narrowly drawn, most work changes require reclassification. Re-organization, work process or technology changes also frequently require classification changes when an organization has narrow classes. As many agencies are finding, (and as the County has probably experienced in its use of broad titles such as in the Information Technology Specialist series) broader class concepts assist the jurisdiction in providing greater ease in work assignment changes to accommodate job restructuring and improve organizational efficiency. The broader class concepts also provide greater assurance that positions within the same occupational field, level of responsibility and similarity of duties are being treated fairly and equitably in terms of relative compensation. Finding A.3: Although the Personnel Department updates classification descriptions when there is employee turnover, the County s classification plan is sufficiently outdated so that this process can no longer assure classification consistency. Lack of consistency is another problem with outdated classification plans. Without systematic updating of the classification plan, different formats occur over time. Some departments resort to creating their own written descriptions to meet internal management needs. This can result in 7

9 multiple formats and, in essence mini-personnel systems. Without consistency and reliability, fundamental fairness is compromised. Finding A.4: Reclassification appears to have been used to promote some employees without having substantive changes in the level of responsibility, particularly in the use of training and lead work classes. Outdated and narrowly based classifications are the result of using reclassifications to promote employees without substantive changes in the level of responsibility. For some classification series, the practice has been to create a separate classification level to recognize lead duties, and assign a higher pay grade although the overall scope of work is very similar. Recommendation A.1: Adopt the Proposed Occupational Index presented in Appendix E where CPS consolidated the County s current 450 management and non-represented classifications to 322 classifications. Recommendation A.2: Complete a comprehensive updating of the written classifications for management and non-represented positions. In keeping with the County s move towards broader classes, CPS provides recommended consolidations for classifications. To support the broader classes, new, modified or updated descriptions will be needed to best manage the staffing, classification and compensation functions. Recommendation A.3: County Council, Courts, and Elected Offices have closer consultation with the Personnel Department on classification matters for County-wide implementation consistency. Although these departments are exempt from the personnel system, consistent classifications and compensation plans for all departments under the County system reduce potential County liabilities, improve employee morale and increase operational efficiency. 8

10 Recommendation A.4: Systematically review management and nonrepresented classifications on a more frequent and comprehensive basis. While the County Personnel Department regularly updates classifications with attrition and turnover, and writes descriptions for newly created classifications, there is no substitute for across-the-board classification studies. CPS typically suggests that organizations review their classification system every 7 to 8 years to ensure the concepts remain valid, the job content is current, and the positions are properly classified. Alternatively, the County could review annually at least 10% - 15% of the management and non-represented classes after the new classification plan is in place to maintain efficiency. Recommendation A.5: Abolish training/lead work classifications. Adding a higher level class in a series should occur only when there has been a substantive change in the level of responsibility. It should not occur just because an employee has been in a job for specific number of years; has reached the end of their pay grade; or because of their work performance. CPS supports the recognition of lead work responsibility as a sound personnel management practice. However, use of a pay policy to recognize lead work is preferable, particularly when the overall scope of work is very similar. There may still be some exceptions to addressing lead work strictly through a pay policy, such as when the lead capacity demands substantially more difficult or complex duties than the positions that it leads. It is our understanding that Pierce County already has a pay policy for recognizing lead work. 9

11 B. Internal Equity Internal equity refers to the hierarchical relationships among job classifications within an organization. It is a fairness criterion that guides a jurisdiction in deciding the relative ranking value of a job classification to the organization. For example, those classifications requiring a greater level of knowledge or ones with a higher level of managerial responsibility should be paid more than classes with less knowledge requirements and responsibility. Finding B.1: Pierce County does not have a systematic job evaluation process. Reliance upon job-to-job comparisons is no longer a dependable method for making classification and pay grade decisions. The County employs a well known job evaluation methodology called job-to-job comparison, also know as whole job ranking. In whole job ranking, jobs are compared to one another as a whole. Some jobs are considered more valuable than others based on the historical pay relationships, labor market data, and the intuitive knowledge and judgment of the analyst. Although whole job ranking is well suited to some organizations, it is difficult to maintain for very large, multi-function organizations. The job-to-job comparison methodology is no longer meeting Pierce County s needs. Finding B.2: Adopting a consistent and systematic job evaluation method will markedly reduce the number of pay grades needed for the management and non-represented classification plan, thereby making both the classification and pay plans easier to administer and producing more consistent application. Point factor evaluation compares and evaluates all classes of work against the same standards. As a result, it is less subjective than comparing one position against another. It focuses the evaluation on a number of factors considered important to the organization, rather than an assessment of task changes. It recognizes strong and weak aspects of all jobs. Two jobs may receive similar or identical evaluation, but one may rank higher due to supervisory duties, while the other may receive higher points due to greater technical knowledge required. 10

12 The Project Steering Committee adopted the following seven (7) common factors for Pierce County as defined in the Position Appraisal Method (PAM). These factors are: Nature of Work and Knowledge and Ability Requirements Supervision Exercised/Scope of Responsibility Scope and Effect of Decisions and Actions Problem Solving and Complexity/Guidelines Application of Authority Purpose and Nature of Work Contacts Physical and Sensory Demands and Hazards Recommendation B.1: Adopt the Position Appraisal Method (PAM), a point factor evaluation tool, to establish and maintain an internal equity system for management and non-represented classification plan. Recommendation B.2: Adopt the weighting of the Position Appraisal Method (PAM) factors as agreed upon by the Project Steering Committee and Performance Audit Committee. Recommendation B.3: Adopt a varying 35/40/45 point band-width approach for establishing the internal equity system as it provides the best alignment of duties and responsibilities, and is a workable method for the County to transition to a new pay structure. C. Labor Market Survey CPS conducted two labor market surveys. A survey of 53 Phase 1 benchmark jobs was conducted in May of 2002 (executive/managerial, elected and non-represented Sheriff and legal classes.) A second survey of 71 Phase 2 benchmark jobs was conducted in June of 2003 (nonrepresented professional, maintenance, trades, and general classes.) For the Phase 1 survey, CPS compiled labor market information for 53 comparable jobs using a list of agencies and benchmark jobs developed in consultation with the County s Personnel 11

13 Department, Project Steering Committee, and the Performance Audit Committee. A group of 49 employers were asked to participate in the survey. Pierce County is the second most populated county in Washington State, next to King County. Therefore, CPS surveyed the top seven Washington counties with respect to largest population as well as other employers in the Northwestern States and similar sized organizations throughout the U.S. Thirty-one employers responded to the market survey. For the Phase 2 project, CPS conducted a second labor market survey of 71 benchmark jobs in 40 agencies in the local Puget Sound area and the Western states. A national survey was not included for these benchmarks jobs. Fifty percent of the employers surveyed responded to the Phase 2 survey and the response was evenly divided between local Puget Sound and Western region agencies. Additional data for both surveys came from published labor market studies. Finding C.1: For executive level and senior management jobs Pierce County s current maximum (top pay step) is close to the local market maximum average (1% above the market benchmark maximums), and higher than the larger regional market average (10.1% above the market maximums.) Finding C.2: For middle and line management, supervisory, professional, and non-represented administrative, trades, maintenance and support jobs Pierce County s current maximum base pay rates are at the local market, and at the average for the regional market. Finding C.3: Although the overall maximum salary average is close to the labor market average, there is great variation in how individual benchmarks are positioned compared to the labor market. Some positions are up to 29 percent above market and others are up to 22 percent below market. Recommendation C.1: Use labor market data for setting the competitiveness of the compensation plan, not individual classes. 12

14 In the analysis of pay data, it is important to remember that it is difficult, if not impossible, to make precise matches between classes of work in different public sector jurisdictions. Matches between public and private sector organizations are even more difficult. In most cases there is no such thing as one overall prevailing rate, rather there is a range of wages from high to low. Therefore, the results of labor market surveys and analysis and evaluation of data provide a general guide in development of pay recommendations. Most importantly, the external data must be balanced by the need for maintaining an appropriate internal alignment within the County s organizational framework. Recommendation C.2: CPS acknowledges that there are some jobs that must be paid at labor market due to labor constraints or shortages. CPS recommends tracking those jobs; and paying labor market rates for the duration of the need. Under special circumstances, Pierce County may need to pay a classification a higher rate than suggested by internal equity ratings to attract or retain qualified employees. The reason may be changes in resource availability, market demand, or special intermediate needs of the County. When the need arises for such out of class/pay rate compensation, the County should be flexible in meeting such accommodation in order to be competitive or efficient. But such special compensation should be temporary in nature and implemented only for the duration of the need. D. Pay Plan Structure The County s current management and non-represented base pay structure consists of seven pay grids that include 125 pay ranges, with 98 ranges now in use. When initially developed more than 20 years ago, each pay grid was intended to correspond with major occupational categories. The E grid was for executive/managerial level classifications; the R grid for professional legal classifications; the K grid for professional classifications; the G grid for general classifications; and so on. There are at least three different pay range widths used among the 98 ranges, 25%, 30%, and 35%. 2 The majority of pay ranges have 10 incremental steps, from the starting rate to the maximum rate. 2 Range widths refer to the percentage spread from the minimum pay rate to the maximum pay rate. 13

15 For the majority of the classifications, employees progress two steps each year until they reach the maximum rate of the range. Employees typically reach the top of their pay grade in five years if they start at the minimum rate of the range, and even sooner if they start somewhere within the range. Progression through a pay range is generally based on an employee s time in grade. Finding D.1: The current system of grids and pay ranges (125 ranges, 98 ranges now in use) has become difficult to manage consistently and is unnecessarily complex. Over time, as the organization has increased in size and complexity, the decision of the grid on which to place jobs has become unclear. The vast numbers of pay grades have little dollar difference, but permit the continuing creation of new titles with new grades, thus perpetuating the complexity. Finding D.2: The shorter pay range widths of 25%, 30% and 35%, and the way that employees progress through a pay range, result in many employees being maxed out at the top of their salary ranges in 5 years or less. This can create pressure on the classification system to reclassify jobs in order to provide pay increases. Finding D.3: The practice of automatic vs. meritorious step increases is restrictive and prohibits recognizing and rewarding variable contribution and performance. Recommendation D.1: Pierce County should move away from automatic step increases and consider greater recognition of performance in granting pay increases. A new pay plan with fewer pay grades is urgently needed. A new base pay plan is needed for traditional reasons of fundamental fairness and administrative efficiency. More importantly, however, a new base pay plan is needed to support managerial accountability, organizational flexibility, and to recognize individual performance and responsibility. 14

16 The reduced number of pay grades for the management and non-represented classification plan will make both the classification and base pay plans easier to administer, and more understandable by policy makers and employees alike. Most importantly, it will allow more consistent application by the Personnel Department and enhance their service to the departments and employees. Recommendation D.2: Establish a new base pay structure for Pierce County with fewer, wider pay bands consistent with the method of linking compensation to internal equity and a competitive placement within the labor market. Recommendation D.3: Adopt a new pay plan for management and non-represented classifications that better supports rewarding performance rather than tenure, and allows for different scenarios for progression including performance-based variable pay that must be re-earned annually. Public officials, private sector employers and taxpayers are increasingly questioning the practice of granting automatic pay increases without regard to performance, as is common in step compensation plans. The fixed step plan also denies County managers the opportunity to reward good performance. Pierce County government is committed to rewarding and retaining competent employees who achieve results in the services they provide. The proposed pay plan can support this goal by permitting variable pay progression based on performance, development and tenure. A detailed discussion of methodology, findings, and recommendations is provided in the following sections of this report. 15

17 II. Introduction In 2002 and 2003, CPS Human Resource Services (CPS) conducted a comprehensive review of the classification and compensation plans for County management and non-represented positions. The stated objectives of the comprehensive review were to: Review internal and external salary equity based on market data; Conduct a salary market study; and Make recommendations on salaries, classifications, and related issues. The methodology in assessing the currency of the classification plan included: collecting up to date job content from all employees in the form of position description questionnaires (PDQ s), interviewing over 600 (nearly 50%) of the position incumbents, applying a point factoring approach to re-establish an internal equity system, and conducting two custom labor market surveys, one for each of the study phases. The custom survey was supplemented by commercial private and public sector surveys. Throughout the project, CPS consultants teamed with Pierce County Personnel Department staff in planning and coordinating project activities and progress. Additionally, several training sessions for internal staff were delivered in order to assure the transfer of knowledge on methodologies, practices and tools. This report represents our findings and recommendations regarding policies, practices and the job classifications as a result of a comprehension review in both Phases 1 and 2. As the findings include a broad array of issues, Pierce County plans to examine the options presented to determine the best course to proceed. The consultant findings and recommendations provide direction on changes that will enhance the classification plan, internal equity process, pay plan structure, and external alignment vis-à-vis relevant labor markets. 16

18 III. Study Background A county-wide performance audit in 1998 described the County s classification and compensation structure as outdated and cumbersome. 3 In early 2002, before revising its classification and compensation plan, the County sought the expertise and objectivity of external consultants experienced in public sector human resource practices. CPS, Human Resource Services was retained to conduct the project. Pierce County employs 1,228 management and non-represented staff, and 1,892 represented staff covered by 25 bargaining agreements. The County s focus for the study was management and non-represented positions, which comprise about 40% of the workforce. The study was divided into two phases with Phase 1 including 198 executive/managerial, elected, and nonrepresented Sheriff and legal positions. Phase 2 focused on the remaining 1,030 nonrepresented positions in professional, maintenance/trades, and general classifications. Represented positions were not a part of the study. The last comprehensive classification study was conducted in A. Phase One Phase 1 of this comprehensive review was carried out under the auspices of the Performance Audit Committee. Phase 1 examined 106 classes (5 of which are elected officials), executive/managerial and non-represented Sheriff and legal classifications on the E, W, N, and R pay grids. Phase 1 was also used to assess the condition of the Pierce County s classification and compensation system and to decide whether to proceed with the larger second phase of the review. At the conclusion of Phase 1, CPS reported its findings and recommendations to the County s Performance Audit Committee: 1. The classification plan required updating; 2. The internal equity system was essentially non-existent; 3. The pay plan needed restructuring; KPMG County-wide Performance Audit,

19 4. The majority of employees in Phase 1 jobs are topped out or near topping out in their pay range; 5. Ninety-eight different pay grades (out of 125 designated) are in use for the E, W, N, R, K, C, and G grids. This makes salary administration unnecessarily difficult and most likely results in jobs being re-classed to achieve pay raises, but without a corresponding substantive change in factors that warrant a higher class; and 6. The 25%, 30%, and 35% widths of pay ranges (minimum to maximum) may be too narrow. CPS recommended that Pierce County complete Phase 2 of the review assessing the classifications, pay plan, market competitiveness of the remaining management and nonrepresented positions in 344 job classifications, and apply an internal equity system to establish a relative ranking for these classifications. B. Phase Two The County elected to proceed with the consultant s recommendation for Phase 2, and work was started in October The second phase included 1,030 non-represented positions in the professional, maintenance/trades, and general classifications. Phase 1 consisted principally of department heads, senior officials and key staff in the Executive branch, County Council, and Prosecutor s office, comprising 16% of the management and non-represented workforce. The other 84% of management and non-represented positions were addressed in Phase 2. Although outside the County s personnel system, the Courts and County elected officials chose to participate in the study due in part to its comprehensive nature and a common desire to strengthen the classification and compensation plans. CPS supports the participation of these departments in the study because as an employer, the County is viewed as one organization. The second study phase was performed under the direction of the Personnel Department, with the Performance Audit committee maintaining contractual oversight. Phase 2 began with a series of employee project orientation meetings and incumbents completed a modified Position Description Questionnaire from Phase 1. The remaining project steps followed the same patterns as those in Phase 1. At the conclusion of Phase 2, CPS combined the findings and recommendations with Phase 1 results in order to provide a comprehensive review of the classification and compensation plans for County management and non-represented positions. 18

20 C. Classification and Compensation System Components There are four basic elements that make up a classification and compensation system: 1) the classification plan; 2) an internal equity method for linking the classification and pay plans; 3) labor market data for assessing the organization s relative competitive position; and 4) the compensation plan. The comprehensive review of Pierce County s classification and compensation system involved examining each of these parts. 1. Classification Plan A classification plan is the foundation upon which a sound personnel management program is established. The classification plan is the basis for developing and implementing other personnel functions such as recruitment and selection, training, performance appraisal, succession management, etc., and when applied in concert with those functions it assists in the development of employees in meeting organizational and performance goals. A classification plan also provides a basis for legal defense of employment-related litigation, and developing a job worth hierarchy for base pay purposes. a) Grouping Similar Jobs. A classification plan groups together into classes those jobs that are basically similar in kind and responsibility of work performed, and training and experience requirements. Job classification is a group of one or more positions, regardless of location, that are alike enough in duties and responsibilities to be called by the same title, to be given the same pay scale under similar conditions and to require substantially the same qualifications. Several jobs performing similar work may be classified in the same classification. By contrast, a position is a group of essential functions, duties, and responsibilities assigned to one individual employee. For a classification, the same pay range can apply with equity under the same, or substantially the same, employment conditions; and the same recruitment and selection criteria may be used to choose qualified employees. b) Classification Review Process. The classification process deals with job content, not an individual s quality of work performance or qualifications. It records only the duties 19

21 that have been assigned to jobs by management. A classification review reflects neither the manner in which such duties are being performed, nor an individual s efficiency, capability, length of service, or experience. c) Classification Descriptions vs Position Descriptions. Ordinarily, two important documents exist simultaneously in public personnel systems: individual position descriptions and classification descriptions. Each document serves a different purpose. The position description identifies specific tasks performed by a single job. It may be used to orient new employees, establish criteria for performance evaluations, improve communications between employees and supervisors, or serve as the basis for managers to reorganize work units or restructure jobs. The Position Description Questionnaires (PDQ s), such as the one completed by employees for the comprehensive review, are used as an information-gathering tool for developing a position description, or could be used as the position description. A classification description, on the other hand, is the basic tool by which management administers the personnel function, primarily in the areas of compensation, recruitment, and selection in accordance with federal and state fair employment laws. Classification descriptions are also referred to as classification specifications or class specs and hence the term classification plan. 2. Internal Equity Internal equity refers to the hierarchal relationship among job classifications within an organization. It is a fairness criterion that guides a jurisdiction in deciding the relative value of a job classification to the organization. Internal equity is used to establish and maintain a pay structure in a consistent and reliable way. An internal equity system uses job factors to rank positions by job content. Those classifications requiring a greater level of knowledge, or ones with a higher level of managerial responsibility, should be paid more than classes with less knowledge and responsibility. Internal equity is based on consistent and reliable job content documentation. This documentation commonly includes valid and accurate position description questionnaires, employee and supervisor interviews, current classification descriptions, and organizational charts. 20

22 3. Labor Market Competitiveness Agencies rely on labor market data collected from other employers, both public and private, to gauge their competitive position. Market data using custom and commercially produced surveys is used for designing and maintaining pay grades and pay plans. Although market data is a very useful tool in salary administration, it is tempered by a jurisdiction s ability to pay. Most agencies strive to be competitive with their base pay and employee benefits. There are periods however, when a jurisdiction may need to be less competitive in order to live within its revenue. Market data is also useful in this context for re-calibrating a pay plan if an economic downturn appears of to be of significant duration. 4. Compensation Plan All of the pay ranges, together with the compensation policies, are referred to as the compensation plan. The goal of an effective compensation plan is to motivate employees to perform behaviors desired by the jurisdiction. The compensation plan puts a dollar value to the rankings of the internal equity system. The basic purpose of Pierce County s compensation plan is to enable it to recruit, retain, and motivate employees; be competitive in the market place; and to assure fair and reliable processes for administering the compensation plan. An assessment of the compensation plan includes the ease of administering the plan, the competitiveness of the pay scales, criteria for progressing through pay ranges, and numerical indicators such as turnover rates and compa-ratios. 4 4 Compa-ratio. The ratio of the actual pay rate to the midpoint or some other control point for the respective pay grade. Comparatios are used mainly to measure and monitor the actual pay rates of individual employees to the midpoint or some other control point of a pay range. 21

23 IV. Study Methodology The approach followed for both phases of the review was the same except for the addition of the employee project orientation meetings at the start of Phase 2, and use of a CPS modified position description questionnaire for the second phase. The final findings and recommendations from both phases of the studies are presented as one report, reflecting the inter-relatedness of the jobs studied. The following sections discuss the consultant s methodology. Chart 1 depicts the methodology followed by CPS in reviewing the classification and compensation system. Chart 1: Summary of Consultant s Methodology 22

24 A. Classification Review 1. Analysis of Current Classification Specifications. CPS reviewed existing Pierce County classification specifications in preparation of both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project. Classification descriptions were reviewed to assess class concept validity, format consistency, and sufficiency of internal equity criteria. When there are several series or levels within the same class, classification specifications for all levels are reviewed for distinguishing differences and common traits. In order to ensure that recommendations for classification and compensation are based on current and accurate job content, the County needed updated information on employees assigned duties and responsibilities. This was done through the completion of the Position Description Questionnaires. 2. Position Description Questionnaires. In February 2002, prior to the involvement of CPS, the County s Personnel Department requested that all executive/managerial and non-represented Sheriff and legal positions complete a Position Description Questionnaire (PDQ) describing their current job duties and responsibilities. The Personnel Department distributed standard PDQ s to incumbents covered by Phase 1 of the review, in advance of selecting a consultant. Employees received written instructions on how to complete the questionnaire. PDQ s were reviewed and signed by supervisors and department heads or appointing authorities. The consultant team received copies of all questionnaires turned in by employees and copies of existing classification descriptions for Phase 1 positions. For Phase 2, CPS provided a modified questionnaire for employees to complete and held a series of meetings for County employees to explain how to complete the PDQ, and to respond to questions about the project. As with Phase 1, CPS reviewed copies of all questionnaires submitted, and copies of existing classification descriptions for Phase 2 positions. If an incumbent employee failed to submit a completed PDQ documenting their job duties, then the position was excluded from review. 23

25 3. Employee & Management Orientation Meetings. Due to the large number and geographic dispersion of jobs covered by Phase 2, employee meetings were held to address the study purpose, scope of review, methodology, and how to complete the PDQ. In these meetings the consultants emphasized that the review was not intended to justify individual increases or decreases in pay or to evaluate employee performance or workload, but instead it was directed at assessing the classification and compensation system, and preparing recommendations to correct any systemic changes found. The consultants also responded to employee questions about the review. These project orientation meetings were held at numerous times and locations to encourage attendance by all employees whose positions were covered by Phase 2 of the review. 4. Employee & Management Interviews. CPS next conducted onsite job analysis interviews with department heads and a sample of employees in both phases of the review. The criteria for determining employees to be interviewed included: obtaining representation at various organizational levels; instances where clarification was needed about an employee s PDQ; and interviewing at least one incumbent in each classification. CPS also sought to accommodate employee requests to be interviewed. The consultant team interviewed 62% percent of the employees covered by Phase 1 and 48% of the employees covered by the Phase 2 of the study. 5. Analysis of Classification Concepts. Based on the review of questionnaires and employee interviews, CPS analyzed work duties and responsibilities to validate current titles and, where necessary, propose new or consolidated titles. In analyzing classification concepts CPS takes into consideration: Occupations and functions Organizational structure Reporting relationships Minimum knowledge and ability requirements Complexity, scope, decision making, and criticality of work These concepts aid in determining whether positions are sufficiently alike to be classified the same and consequently compensated the same. 24

26 Position classification assists management by providing flexibility in organizing and structuring work to effectively meet operational needs. It also supports sound human resource practices by consistently recognizing work across departments, so employees assigned similar duties are classified the same. A current classification plan provides a fair basis for recognizing and compensating employees who are assigned substantively higher level responsibilities. From the review and analysis of job content and class descriptions, CPS was able to recommend a number of changes to the classification plan. B. Internal Equity 1. Assessing Internal Alignment of Jobs. CPS applied a quantitative job evaluation system during Phase 1, known as the Position Appraisal Method (PAM), to gauge the presence and extent of an internal equity system. Based on its internal equity analysis of Phase 1 classifications, CPS concluded that Pierce County no longer had a viable internal equity system and recommended establishing one during Phase 2, using the Position Appraisal Method. The Position Appraisal Method enables jurisdictions, such as Pierce County, to systematically and consistently value work in relation to other work being carried out in the organization. The PAM compares and evaluates all classes of work against the same defined job factors. As a result, it is less subjective than comparing one position as a whole against another. It focuses evaluation on all defined factors and recognizes strong and weak aspects of all jobs. Two jobs may receive similar or identical evaluation, but one may rank higher due to supervisory duties while the other may receive higher points due to greater technical knowledge required. 2. Point Factor Evaluation. All job classes were rated on every factor. The most descriptive degree defined in the PAM for each factor was matched to the job. Each of the factors had points assigned to each descriptive degree. Then the point values for all factors were totaled, giving each classification a numeric value. The total point values for the classes provided a relative ranking, or relative internal worth, for each classification. In Phase I the Project Steering Committee received background training 25

27 in how the PAM system works and practiced applying the factors to sample jobs to better understand the effect of specific factors and factor weights. Appendix A outlined the PAM, the factors utilized and the degree definitions. The point factoring results were shared with the Project Steering Committee to affirm the factor weights and internal relationships it created 5. Committee members also reviewed the point factoring results and provided comments. As supported by job content, further refinements in point factoring were made as a result of Steering Committee comments and suggestions. During the Phase 2 of the study, CPS applied the point factoring system to the remaining management and non-represented classifications for those that with written documentation of current job content. Internal equity analysis from both study phases was then combined. 3. Multiple Rater Approach. The factor and degree definitions were interpreted and applied by the consultant team using a multiple rater approach. With this method, several raters evaluate or rate the classifications on each of the seven factors and then compare the ratings for each factor, and identify, discuss and resolve any factoring differences to ensure inter-rater reliability. 4. Determine Point Factor Ranges. Point factoring systems result in point scores that are used for ranking job classifications and developing pay ranges. To establish a framework for clustering the classifications by point scores, natural breaks in the data are used. When there are no natural breaks or the overall data set is very broad, as with the County s management and non-represented classifications, then point ranges are used to introduce data breaks. These data breaks determine the number of pay ranges. The point ranges are also referred to as job bands. Between each job band there is a minimum of 5 points to separate the bands. This is to avoid the possibility of close to or almost being applied to rationalize assigning a classification to the next higher band. 5. Internal relationships are the differentials created between supervisory and subordinate positions, and the differentials established along occupational lines. 26

28 Point factoring is nonetheless dependent on the quality and accuracy of the job content provided. The setting of band-widths allows the introduction of some very basic labor market differences as we begin to build the structure for a new pay plan. The width of a point factoring band can be used to represent the type of labor market an organization draws from. A shorter width may represent the local market and a longer width may represent a regional or even national market. C. Labor Market Survey CPS conducted two labor market surveys. A survey of 53 Phase 1 benchmark jobs was conducted in May of A second survey of 71 Phase 2 benchmark jobs was conducted in June of A list of employers surveyed in Phases 1 and 2 is shown in Appendices B and C. 1. Phase 1 Survey. In the recruitment of executives, Pierce County competes in local, regional and national labor markets. CPS compiled labor market information for 53 comparable jobs using a list of agencies and benchmark descriptions developed in consultation with the County s Personnel Department, Project Steering Committee, and the Performance Audit Committee. A group of 49 employers were asked to participate in the survey. The employer group was comprised of 18 local public sector employers, 13 local and state governments in the Pacific Northwest region (Washington, Oregon and Idaho), and 18 local governments nationally and in the Western region (Appendix B.) Pierce County is the second most populated county in Washington State, next to King County. CPS surveyed the top seven Washington counties with respect to largest population. Thirty-one employers responded to the market survey. 2. Phase 2 Survey. CPS conducted a second labor market survey of 71 benchmark jobs in 40 agencies in the local Puget Sound area and the Western states of Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada, and Utah (Appendix C.) Only agencies in Western states were included in the Phase 2 survey, whereas the Phase 1 survey included local governments in non-western states. Fifty percent of the employers surveyed responded to the Phase 2 survey and the response was evenly divided between local Puget Sound and Western region agencies. 27

29 Additional data came from published surveys. The Northwest Management and Professional Salary Survey by Milliman USA was used as a source of private sector data. The Washington County Employees Salary and Benefit Surveys for 2002 and 2003, published by the Association of Washington Cities, in cooperation with Washington State Association of Counties served as one means of assessing the comparability of employer data. This was in addition to calling employers and verifying the comparability of individual benchmarks reported. The most recent salary and benefit survey of the National Association of Medical Examiners (2002) was also a published survey source for Medical Examiner and pathologist benchmarks. D. Compensation Plan The 16 job bands established by point factoring analysis provide a structure for creating a new pay plan. The market surveys showed that Pierce County, overall is competitive with the local Puget Sound labor market. In designing a new pay plan the challenge is to maintain the County s competitive position and put in place a structure that reflects internal job worth, while remaining cognizant of the County s fiscal position. CPS developed three pay plan options for consideration. All three options include a base pay range and a variable pay range, with a combined range for each grade of 50%. Pay Plan Options 1 and 3 are designed with open ranges for both the base rate and variable pay ranges, whereas the base rate ranges for Pay Plan Option 2 are incremental steps similar to the County s current pay structure. For all three pay plan options, advancement to the variable part of the range and progression through it would be based on employee performance, and require more than just satisfactory or average performance. E. Knowledge Transfer/Training CPS continues to encourage knowledge transfer to Pierce County Personnel Department staff. It is critical that County staff responsible for administering the classification and compensation plans understand CPS strategies, methodologies, approaches, and tools used in the study to ensure consistent application and continuation of best practice classification and compensation activities. Teams were set up combining Personnel Analysts and consultants for designated study group and/or departments to conduct audit meetings, PAM factoring and evaluation of 28

30 results. Formal training sessions were also conducted for Pierce County Personnel Department staff for the following topics: Classification & Compensation Systems Job Evaluation and Analysis Classification Specifications Conducting Classification Studies Internal Equity Position Appraisal Methods (PAM) The report s remaining sections discuss our findings and recommendations with respect to the classification plan, internal equity, labor market, and the pay plan structure. 29

31 V. Findings & Recommendations A. Classification Plan Classification is the process of grouping individual positions into broader groupings for personnel, budgeting and other management purposes. Classification sorts the work of individual positions based on type of work and then levels of responsibility and difficulty. As such, it is not an exact science but rather a reasonable arrangement of work efforts and activities. Beyond legal constraints, what is most reasonable is that which works best for a particular organization. The resulting classification descriptions serve as the basic documents for many human resource management functions. They are used to develop recruitment and selection criteria. The job content in classification descriptions is a basis for training and development programs. It is also the basic document for position classification and compensation decisions. 1. Classification Plan Findings The Personnel Department has done well trying to maintain the integrity of the class concepts. The Department updates the classification descriptions for the Executive branch jobs when there is turnover. This has produced a generally consistent classification for many of the jobs. However, without the benefit of comprehensive classification studies, without a structured job evaluation tool and with the availability of many different pay grades, there is the tendency to recognize and distinguish many differences in work. The County last conducted a comprehensive review in Since that time there have been significant changes in services, technology, operations and organization. The classification concepts suited to the 80 s no longer meet the required operational competitiveness and evolving working culture, resources and government service standards in the 21 st century. 30

32 Finding A.1: The management and non-represented classification plan, as a whole, no longer adequately and consistently reflects the work assigned and manner by which work is organized in Pierce County. In reviewing the detail of County work assignments described in the position description questionnaires, we noted several instances of: Jobs with different titles performing essentially similar duties and responsibilities. Jobs with the same class title, with significantly different assignment of duties and responsibilities. Jobs distinguished by time in grade rather than by job content. The Information Technology area is an example of these findings. The title Department Information Technology Specialist is used for those IT jobs in departments outside the Information Services Department. Information Services Department employees are classified as Information Technology Specialist; yet all are performing information technology work. The administrative support area also demonstrates the need for more frequent classification reviews. There are 20 different titles, listed in Figure 1, to describe essentially five different levels of clerical and administrative work. Figure 1: Existing Pierce County Administrative Support Titles PA LEGAL ASSISTANT OFFICE ASSISTANT 1 COUNCIL ADMIN 1 OFFICE ASSISTANT 2 COUNCIL ADMIN 2 OFFICE ASSISTANT 3 COUNCIL ADMIN 3 OFFICE ASSISTANT 4 COUNCIL ADMIN 4(A) ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE COUNCIL ADMIN 4(B) ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT COUNCIL LEGAL CLERK 2 SUPERVISORY ADMIN ASST DATA ENTRY TECH 2 JUV COURT ADMIN SPEC DATA ENTRY TECH 3 CONFIDENTIAL SECRETARY CLERICAL AIDE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Consultants noted in some of the departments that employees have been kept at a higher classification within a class series even though the employee is performing lower level work. Although fairly rare, we found this situation to occur more often in County departments that are 31

33 exempt from the Personnel System than those that are governed by it. As an example, an employee who has previously been in a supervisory classification, but is no longer supervising subordinates; or an employee who has been at a higher level classification and has duties removed due to reorganization, job restructuring or some other reason, may still remain in the higher level classification and corresponding pay grade. This practice, if allowed to continue, undermines the integrity of the classification plan and the County s ability to fairly and consistently administer the plan. Finding A.2: Although the County has adopted broad classification concepts in some occupational areas, the County still has many classifications with narrow distinctions. In reviewing the class specifications, Pierce County s management and non-represented specifications have become outdated. In some instances the classification factors that comprise the descriptions are no longer current. Some of the descriptions are now narrowly defined to apply only to specific departments, while others are overly broad and no longer meaningful for describing distinguishing features of a classification. This makes it difficult to not only administer a classification plan, but also results in jobs that perform similar work being assigned to different titles and pay grades. Pierce County may be overpaying some job positions and underpaying others. This can create the perception of favored departments or favored employees, thus creating employee relations and morale problems. Broad vs Narrow Class Concepts Over time, it appears that classifications defining a narrower range of duties have evolved/been created. This occurs in response to a special request from departments to create a department-specific classification; or because a job doesn t precisely fit an existing classification; and/or to pay a job at a rate higher than an existing class. In Pierce County, this has resulted in many narrower class concepts. The County has already accomplished broader class concepts with some series like the Planner series. As other public sector organizations have experienced, the County might have found that broad concepts better support modern organizations. Agencies are examining, more 32

34 frequently, the use of more broadly defined job classifications as a tool for structuring and aligning work and human resources. 6 The advantages of broad class concepts include: Greater ease of administration, especially with regard to work changes, as well as record keeping and analysis of classification and pay relationships. Greater assurance that positions within the same occupational field, level of responsibility and similarity of duties are being treated fairly and equitably. Greater ease of job rotation and work assignment changes to accommodate job restructuring and work changes required to manage organizational efficiency. Limitations to Broad Classifications and the Americans with Disabilities Act As a caveat to the advantages of broad classifications, noted in Figure 2, are some of the limitations to broad classifications. Physical requirements are a key feature for defining distinct qualifications. Most of the classification descriptions in Pierce County have no assessment of working conditions and physical demands of the various jobs. Figure 2: Limitations to Broad Classifications Selection processes and hiring requirements. If jobs that are significantly different are combined too broadly, the job descriptions cannot be used effectively as a guide for hiring employees. Physical requirements of work. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires job descriptions that accurately identify physical requirements of work. If jobs have significantly different physical requirements, they must be separated for selection purposes. Internal equity. Jobs that are different in terms of compensable factors, such as knowledge, problem solving, or accountability, should be classified separately in order to help ensure internal equity. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 provides that, in an employment context, employers are to make reasonable accommodations for those defined as disabled under the act. Reasonable Accommodation includes adapting job duties, work environment or physical demands of the job. Assessing the reasonableness of such an accommodation requires first determining and documenting the physical demands and working conditions of the position. While the ADA prescribes the accommodation analysis to be job and person specific, written descriptions are a source document under the ADA for evaluating the reasonableness of the accommodation to be made. CPS collected working conditions and physical demands information for the Phase 2 positions in the modified position description questionnaire. 6 Modernizing Job Classification, National Academy of Public Administration,

35 Finding A.3: Although the Personnel Department updates classification descriptions when there is employee turnover, the County s classification plan is sufficiently outdated so that this process can no longer assure classification consistency. Lack of consistency is another problem with outdated classification plans. Without systematic updating of the classification plan, differing formats occur over time. Some departments resort to creating their own written descriptions to meet internal management needs. This can result in multiple formats and, in essence mini-personnel systems. Without consistency and reliability, fundamental fairness is compromised. There were notable differences in the quality of the classifications for Phase 1 jobs vs. Phase 2 jobs. There were a higher number of jobs in Phase 1 that either have no written classification descriptions or they were in an outdated format. This may be attributed in part to the positions of the County Council, Superior and District Courts, and the Prosecuting Attorney being exempt from the Personnel Department s administration of the classification plan. 7 Out of the 101 classifications in Phase 1 whose duties are not defined by code, written descriptions do not exist for 25% of the current classification titles. Phase 2, under the management of the Personnel Department, had few missing classifications. Table 1: Phase 1 Classification Description Quality Government Branch # of Class Titles # of Missing # in Current Format Descriptions County Council Courts Executive Totals Pierce County Charter, Art. 7,

36 Finding A.4: Reclassification appears to have been used to promote some employees without having substantive changes in the level of responsibility, particularly in the use of training/lead work classifications. Reclassification and Use of Training/Lead Classifications Another concern with outdated and narrowly based classifications is the use of reclassifications to promote employees without there being substantive changes in the level of responsibility. Reclassification should occur only when there has been a substantive change in the level of responsibility. It should not occur just because an employee has been in a job for a specific number of years; has reached the end of their pay grade; or level of work performance. For some classification series the County has had in place a trainee level classification, such as Legal Assistant 1, whereby the employee is promoted at the end of a specified period of time. The training classifications are separate from the concept of a probationary period of employment. Under a training classification, employees are expected to be doing work at the next higher classification level after an initial induction and probationary period. They are automatically moved to the next classification level at the end of the training time, which may run from one to two years depending on the classification in question. In another example, trainee classification was used to address performance issues. Then too there are classifications developed just to recognize lead work responsibility. For some classification series, the practice has been to make a separate classification level to recognize lead work and assign a higher pay grade. This can be addressed via a lead work pay policy instead of creating a new classification. 2. Classification Plan Recommendations Outdated and non-existent classification descriptions create personnel management difficulties in addition to improper compensation and morale problems. Having updated written descriptions also assists Pierce County with assuring compliance with fair employment laws and practices, and other employment related laws and regulations. 35

37 CPS estimates that the County could streamline its management and non-represented classification plan by up to 32%, from 450 to 322 classifications, by using broader class concepts and applying them to jobs in the Courts, County Council and Elected Official s departments, as well as departments of the Executive branch. Occupational Index & Related References To help understand the degree of consolidation that CPS advocates for the management and non-represented classifications, CPS has prepared a table with current and proposed classification titles. Appendix D illustrates the management and non-represented class listing and proposed consolidation of classification title changes. A classification plan has the same need for organization, as do various financial accounts in a chart of accounts. The grouping of the different classifications into a systematic plan based on occupational similarities is called an occupational index. The Proposed Occupational Index, in Appendix E, organizes the proposed classification titles by occupational groupings. Appendix F contains a glossary of commonly used terms relating to classification and compensation systems. Overall, CPS recommendations can be summarized in the following Table 2. Table 2. Overview of Classification Changes Classification Issue Number Current number of titles in use, Phases 1 and Current average number of positions per class 2.73 Number of titles proposed 321 Proposed average number of positions per class 3.83 Number of titles proposed for change

38 Recommendation A.1: Adopt the Proposed Occupational Index presented in Appendix E where CPS consolidated the County s current 450 management and non-represented classifications to 322 classifications. Recommendation A.2: Complete a comprehensive updating of the written classifications for management and non-represented positions. When moving toward broader classes, CPS advocates the County seek, when possible, to consolidate classifications. New, modified or updated written descriptions will be needed to support broader classification and to best manage the staffing, classification and compensation functions. Recommendation A.3: County Council, Courts, and Elected Offices have closer consultation with the Personnel Department on classification matters for County-wide implementation consistency. Although these departments are exempt from the personnel system, consistent classifications and compensation plans for all departments under the County system improves employee morale, increases operational efficiency, and minimizes potential employment related liability for the County. Recommendation A.4: Systematically review management and nonrepresented classifications on a more frequent and comprehensive basis. There is no substitute for across-the-board classification studies. CPS typically suggests that organizations review their classification system every 7 to 8 years to ensure the concepts remain valid, the job content is current, and the positions are properly classified. Or, alternatively review annually at least 10% - 15% of the management and non-represented classes after the new classification plan is in place to maintain efficiency. 37

39 Recommendation A.5 Abolish training/lead work classifications. By maintaining a training level of classifications and then promoting employees at the end of the training period, the County is creating an expectation that reclassification may occur after a particular time in grade. Such an expectation, if it exists, needs correction. Adding a higher level class in a series should occur only when there has been a substantive change in the level of responsibility. A job should not, however, be reclassified to a higher pay grade as a reward for an employee s work performance. Superior performance is best addressed through recognition and performance management policy and practice. Similarly, a job should not be reclassified just because an employee has topped out in their pay grade; or has been in a job for a prescribed number of years. CPS supports the recognition of lead work responsibility as a sound personnel management practice. However, use of a pay policy to recognize lead work is preferable, particularly when the overall scope of work is very similar. There may still be some exceptions to addressing lead work strictly through a pay policy, such as when the lead capacity demands substantially more difficult or complex duties than the positions that it leads. It is our understanding that Pierce County already has a pay policy for recognizing lead work. B. Internal Equity Internal equity refers to the consistency of classification and pay within an organization. Job evaluation is the method for determining the relative internal worth of job classifications to the organization. Internal equity is also the means for linking jobs with readily available market data with those jobs that are unique or specific to the organization, and therefore more difficult to find comparables matches in the labor market. Without an established job evaluation system, job classifications get assigned to pay grades based on individual employee attributes rather than job content and labor market considerations. This undermines the principle of equal pay for equal work and basic principles of public personnel management. 38

40 1. Internal Equity Findings Finding B.1: Pierce County does not have a systematic job evaluation process. Reliance upon job-to-job comparisons is no longer a dependable method for making classification and pay grade decisions. Finding B.2: Adopting a consistent and systematic job evaluation method will markedly reduce the number of pay grades needed for the management and nonrepresented classification plan, thereby making both the classification and pay plans easier to administer and producing more consistent application. The County has relied on job-to-job comparisons when making classification and pay grade decisions. A job-to-job comparative process for job evaluation assumes a comprehensive review is conducted every four to five years to ensure classification standards are current. If there haven t been comprehensive reviews over a 20+ year period, then the job-to-job comparative method results in narrowly drawn classes being created, positions being potentially misclassified, and overall difficulty in maintaining the classification plan. The Position Appraisal Method CPS used the point-factoring job evaluation process known as the Position Appraisal Method (PAM) to consistently and systematically determine the internal equity alignment for the County s Phase 1 and Phase 2 classifications. In the point factor evaluation process, classes are compared and evaluated against the same well-defined standards. As a result, it is less subjective than comparing one position against another. It focuses evaluation of a number of factors (often called compensable factors) considered important to the organization. While point factor methodologies require more structured decisions, they still have elements of subjectivity. CPS sought to minimize these elements by assigning consultants experienced and trained in both comparative and quantitative job evaluation and by use of a multiple rater approach when applying the factoring instrument to the management and non-represented job classifications. 39

41 The Position Appraisal Method (PAM) is a non-proprietary job evaluation method, specifically developed for local governments and other public sector organizations. It has been successfully implemented in over 180 agencies nationwide. This method cross-compares position classification factors for all jobs and for each value level of each factor. Therefore, dissimilar classes can be evaluated since it is the relation of duties to the factors that are evaluated, not duties against other duties. The system is designed to be: Free of occupational, gender, racial, and other bias; Compatible with and supportive of job restructuring which may occur; and Adaptable to new or revised organizational missions, goals, and structures through adjustable factors, degrees, and value ranges. The Position Appraisal Method relies upon seven (7) common job factors that were applied to the management and non-represented classifications proposed by CPS in the Occupational Index (Appendix E.) These factors and corresponding weights are: FACTORS WEIGHTING 1. Knowledge 20% 2. Supervision Exercised/Scope of Responsibility 10% 3. Scope and Effect of Decisions and Actions 20% 4. Problem Solving and Complexity/Extent of Guidelines 20% 5. Application of Authority 10% 6. Purpose and Nature of Work Contacts 10% 7. Physical and Sensory Demands and Hazards 10% Total 100% Point Factor Application PAM assesses the work of a job class from the perspective of the seven factors defined above. A first step was to come to agreement on relative weighting (or importance) of the factors to best reflect overall organizational mission, goals, and values of Pierce County. The weights shown in the WEIGHTING column were developed by the Project Steering Committee and then reviewed with the County s Performance Audit Committee. Each job class was rated on each factor by selecting the most descriptive degree and multiplying it times the relevant weighting. 40

42 Thus the lowest level of knowledge is worth 20 points in the County (1 times 20.) The point values for all factors were totaled, giving each classification a numeric value. The total point values for all of the classes provided a relative ranking, or relative internal worth, for each classification. Same Standards Used The PAM compares and evaluates all classes of work against the same standards. As a result, it is much less subjective than comparing one position against another. It forces evaluation on all factors and recognizes strong and weak aspects of all jobs. Two jobs may receive similar or identical evaluation, but one may rank higher due to supervisory duties while the other may receive higher points due to greater technical knowledge required. Over time jobs change with respect to duties and responsibilities, or new classes are added. The Position Appraisal Method provides a way to measure changes in job content and to rank new classes. It also can be used by the Personnel Department to show that previous differences between two classifications no longer exist. For instance, when applied to the Council Research 3 and 4 classifications, both scored the same. This indicates there are no longer two classification levels and the class concept should be revised, eliminating one of the classifications. When new duties are added or duties change, the new job components are reevaluated with the PAM instrument and if the point total is higher, a higher pay grade may result. It is important to note that not all job changes result in pay grade changes. Pay grade changes are accompanied by substantively greater knowledge, responsibility, and decision making, or related job criteria. Employee Performance and Workload Not Considered We emphasize that the Position Appraisal Method does not evaluate an individual employee s work performance; it only measures work officially assigned and expected to perform. The efforts of an employee (i.e. performance) can effect the classification and its evaluation or ranking only when those efforts result in the addition or deletion of duties and responsibilities. PAM will measure significant changes in work and determine whether a different ranking of the classification specification is warranted. 41

43 2. Internal Equity Recommendations A consistent and systematic job evaluation method will markedly reduce the number of pay grades needed for the management and non-represented classification plan, thereby making both the classification and base pay plans easier to administer, more understandable by policy makers and employees alike, and most importantly, more consistent application for the Personnel Department and the departments and employees it serves. Rater Reliability Using the Position Appraisal Method There are a number of measures that may be taken to enhance rater consistency and improve reliability. These measures are: Assuring careful and thorough training of raters in the understanding and use of the PAM. Making revisions to factor or degree definitions found to be the basis for misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Assuring that the job or occupational knowledge and documentation available to the raters is accurate, complete, and free of bias. Having several raters rate the same classification or job on each of the several factors and then compare ratings on each factor; discuss ratings and identify reasons for differences, i.e., differences in the rater's knowledge and understanding of the work and responsibility of the position being evaluated. Having one rater evaluate and rate two or more different but similar classification or positions that have been determined to be essentially equal in value; compares ratings by factors and in totals, and determines if differences in ratings can be accounted for in terms other than rater bias, error, or other inconsistency, i.e., differences in the accuracy and adequacy of the classification and position descriptions or other job information used in the rating. Having several raters evaluate and rate two or more different but similar classifications or positions which have been determined to be essentially equal in value; compare ratings by raters for each factor for each classification or position, and determine the bases for differences. Other methods are essentially variations of the above, i.e., compare ratings by raters on classifications or positions of clearly different value or rank and determine consistency or 42

44 correlation of ratings; compare ratings of one or more raters on one or more classifications or positions after an elapse of time; rank or compare a group of classifications or positions factor by factor and then rate them by factors using a different set of raters; and determine reasons for inconsistencies between rankings and point ratings. Another highly important means of improving rater reliability is the establishment and use of well defined benchmark classifications for which there has been consistent agreement as to ratings. When this method is used, benchmarks should be established for each level in each class series and new or revised classes and positions are then ranked and rated in relation to such benchmarks. Recommendation B.1: Adopt the Position Appraisal Method (PAM), a point factor evaluation tool, to establish and maintain an internal equity system for management and non-represented classification plan. Recommendation B.2: Adopt the weighting of the Position Appraisal Method (PAM) factors as agreed upon by the Project Steering Committee and Performance Audit Committee. Recommendation B.3: Adopt a varying 35/40/45 point band-width approach for establishing the internal equity system as it provides the best alignment of duties and responsibilities, and is a workable method for the County to transition to a new pay structure. The County s management and non-represented classifications cover a wide range of occupations, from custodial, clerical support, middle management and professional, to the highest levels of executive management. In our experience, use of a point band structure with some variability in the band-width best reflects the County s variety of classifications and responsibility levels. CPS advocates using a varying 35/40/45 point band structure (Appendix G, Internal Equity Point Bands), for establishing the County s internal equity system, as shown in Table 3. 43

45 Table 3. Point Band Ranges Band Point Range The setting of band-widths becomes the means for linking internal equity with labor market data. The width of a point factoring band can be used to represent the type of labor market from which an organization draws its data. A shorter width may represent the local market, and a longer width may represent a regional or even national market. The process of establishing reasonable band-widths relies on a framework for clustering the classifications by point scores and natural breaks in the data When there are no natural breaks, or the overall spread of data is very broad, as with the County s management and nonrepresented classifications, then point spreads are used to introduce consistent data breaks. How broad or how narrow to make the point spreads depends on the types of jobs being evaluated. Although other band-widths could be appropriate, CPS advocates using proposed point bands in devising a new pay structure. Band 8 has the highest number of classifications and includes the median point factoring score. Department directors and high level senior staff would fall into four bands (10 13.) The varying band-widths best reflect the job content of Pierce County s management and non-represented classifications and would complement a pay structure with more than just one pay range width. It also considerably reduces the number of pay ranges; resulting in less administration time and cost to the County. It also lessens the existence of minor distinctions; thereby broadening positive perceptions about internal equity. C. Labor Market Survey There are three major steps to surveying the labor market: 1. Defining the labor market to be surveyed; 2. Selection of benchmarks; and 3. Analysis of employer pay rates reported. The labor market is defined as the geographical area in which an employer can reasonably be expected to compete for its staff. For example, the appropriate labor market for administrative support jobs is usually the local one. On the other hand, to recruit the requisite skills and 44

46 expertise for management, executive and some hard-to-fill professional positions, the labor market is often statewide, regional or even national. Pierce County is located in the southern Puget Sound area of Washington State. Because of its geographic proximity to Seattle and other municipalities in the Puget Sound area and state government in Olympia, it competes for much of its labor locally. In recent years, the County has recruited regionally and nationally for some attorney, information technology, and engineering positions. There are several considerations in defining the labor market, including areas from which employees are recruited, reside, and work; factors affecting turnover and separation; comparative economic conditions; and work force composition considerations. Attempts are made to find employers with similar occupations to match to benchmark positions. Two fundamental views There are two fundamental views about defining a labor market. One view holds that only those employers that match as closely as possible in terms of population, as well as organizational size, plus functional responsibility should be used in deciding which employer data to use when surveying the labor market. With this approach, the number of agencies used is typically smaller and more specific to a particular benchmark. Also, it often is the same set of agencies that is looked to for market data. It may be argued that instead of surveying the market, this approach is indexing pay to a pre-determined group of employers, much like a loan rate at a bank or a cost-of-living adjustment program. Then, when the jurisdictional pay index rises, so too should that for the benchmark. The challenge with this approach is two-fold: 1) no two benchmarks usually have the same small number of agencies to compare with, and therefore conducting a salary survey with more than a handful of benchmarks is problematic; and 2) few agencies can afford to keep adjusting pay in response to a pre-determined market, especially in lean fiscal times. It also creates a tendency for spiraling pay increases where the increase in one jurisdiction requires a competing pay change in the next jurisdiction. 45

47 A second view holds that agencies should survey employers within the geographic area in which it recruits and competes for labor. This second view results in using data from agencies with more variance in organizational size and population and functional responsibility. In that regard, it represents a survey of the labor market from high to low, with differences in jurisdictional and departmental sizes, and functional responsibility differences. Selection of Benchmarks The Project Steering Committee assisted the CPS consultant team with identifying benchmark jobs for conducting the labor market surveys. The benchmark classifications surveyed in Phases 1 and 2 were developed in consultation with the County s Performance Audit Committee. Fifty-three jobs were surveyed in Phase 1 and 71 benchmarks were surveyed in Phase 2 of the comprehensive review. Analysis of Labor Market Results Salary data were analyzed by pay range maximums for local and regional labor markets. Most of Pierce County s management and non-represented employees are at or near the maximum pay step of their pay range. Comparison with labor market maximum pay rates is a more meaningful pay comparison than the midpoint of the pay ranges. The summary results of the salary surveys from Phase 1 and Phase 2 are shown in Appendices H and I. Shown below, in Figure 3, are the definition of terms and abbreviations used when reporting and analyzing the market survey results. 1. Labor Market Findings Figure 3: Survey Results Definitions: Average Maximum Salary or Average Range High As presented in this report, the maximum is the average or mean of highest level wages reported by surveyed employers. Since it represents an average, the actual maximum wage of individual employers will typically be higher or lower than the average rate reported. Average Actual Salary As presented in this report, the average actual salary represents the average or mean of the actual salaries paid. Pierce County Range High, % Higher or Lower As used in this report, this column reports as a percentage Pierce County s relative position to the average range high or average maximum salary for the local and regional labor markets. A negative number means the County s rates are below the labor market. Insufficient Data CPS required at least three comparable job matches before using the data reported by surveyed employers. When there were fewer than three job matches, then it was shown as insufficient data. No Match or No Match Found For benchmarks with no comparable job matches, these are reported as no match or no match found. 46

48 Our analysis of Pierce County s existing pay ranges, as compared with the local and regional labor markets, suggests that the County s base pay at the maximum rate is generally competitive with the surveyed labor market. Specifically we found: Finding C.1: For executive level and senior management jobs Pierce County s current maximum (top pay step) is close to the local market maximum average (1% above the market benchmark maximums), and higher than the larger regional market average (10.1% above the market maximums.) Pierce County s current maximum base pay rates are slightly above the local market for executive level and senior management jobs (1% above the market benchmark maximums.) Pierce County s current maximum base pay rates are above the regional labor market for executive level and senior management jobs (10.1% above the market maximums.) Finding C.2: For middle and line management, supervisory, professional, and non-represented administrative, trades, maintenance and support jobs - Pierce County s current maximum base pay rates are at the local market, and at the average for the regional market. Finding C.3: Although the overall maximum salary average is close to the labor market average, there is great variation in how individual benchmarks are positioned compared to the labor market. Some positions are up to 29 percent above market and others are up to 22 percent below market. At first impression, based on the results of both surveys, it appears that several of the County s jobs are overpaid and underpaid. In the Phase 1 salary survey, the benchmarks ranged from the Economic Development Manager, appearing to be 21.6% below market, to the Clerk to the Council, being 29.1% above market. This represents a variance of 50.7% from low to high 47

49 (-21.6% to 29.1%.) In the Phase 2 survey, the benchmarks ranged from the Adult Probation Officer 1, appearing to be 17% below market, to the Judicial Assistant, being 47% above market. This represents a low to high variance (-17% to 47% of 64%.) Yet, when we examine the difference between Pierce County s maximum pay step versus the local market maximum pay rates, the overall average for the Phase 1 survey was +1%, and 0% for the Phase 2 survey. A reasonable question is how can there be such a wide spread in the data, from low to high in both surveys while the overall result is at or very near the local market average? The answer is that Pierce County has not had a consistent internal equity system in place for managing its compensation. The County currently uses nearly 100 different pay grades for its management and non-represented job classifications. This is about three to four times the number used by agencies of similar size. It is the combination of the large number of pay grades, plus the absence of a consistent internal equity system that resulted in the wide variances versus market comparators. Other Labor Market Observations Nationally, the economy has improved during the first three quarters of Locally in Pierce County, however, economic indicators continue to lag behind the national economy. The unemployment rate in Pierce County appeared to peak for the year in June, when it reached 8.2%, but it did not dip below 7% throughout 2002, and up to September The local unemployment rate has been 1% to 1.5% above the national rate. The CPI rate of growth for Pierce County went down in October by 0.7% from August. 9 The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is another indicator used when examining wage and salary costs. It is similar to the CPI except that it follows only changes in wages and salaries, rather than the cost of goods and services. The 12-month percentage change for state and local government wages and salaries as measured by the ECI has been running at 3% for Within Washington State, larger counties and local/regional cities are reporting pay increases of between two and three percent, as shown in Table 4. Pierce County s pay increase in 2003 was 1.53%. Although the County gives competitive across-the-board adjustments, these COLA s don t change the individual pay differentials. 8 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor 9 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, CPI-October 2003 for Tacoma, Washington/Pierce County. 48

50 Table 4: Salary Increases Reported by Washington State Local Governments 10 Counties Percentage Increase Cities Percentage Increase Clark 3.5% Bellevue 2.0% King 2.0% Federal Way 1.71% Kitsap 2.75% Olympia 3.0% Snohomish 1.05% Puyallup 2.1% Spokane 1.5% Seattle 2.0% Thurston 1.5% Tacoma 3.0% Yakima 2.25% Vancouver 1.3% 2. Labor Market Recommendations Recommendation C.1: Use labor market data for setting the competitiveness of the compensation plan, not individual classes. In the analysis of pay data, it is important to remember that it is difficult, if not impossible, to make precise matches between classes of work in different public sector jurisdictions. Matches between public and private sector organization are even more difficult. In most cases there is no such thing as one overall prevailing rate; rather there is a range of wages from high to low. Labor market data is valuable in salary plan design and administration. But there are inherent limitations on the use of such data. There are several factors to keep in mind when analyzing external market data. The first of these is that agencies are organized differently with different priorities, organizational structures, goals, and current issues. It s not always possible, nor necessary, to match each and every benchmark to the labor market. In general, the compensation structure should reflect labor market rates. When there is a well established internal equity system, benchmarks can generally be priced in accord with the labor market. Other job classifications are then placed on the pay structure based on the appropriate internal alignment within the County s organizational framework. 10 General increase as reported in the 2003 Washington County Employees Salary and Benefits Survey, Association of Washington Cities. 49

51 It is the combination of the market, an internal equity system, and a fair and transparent pay grade progression process that best provide for a competitive and technically sound rewards system. The results of the labor market surveys are only one piece of information that is used in designing a new pay plan for Pierce County. Recommendation C.2: CPS acknowledges that there are some jobs that must be paid at labor market due to labor constraints or shortages. CPS recommends tracking those jobs; and paying labor market rates for the duration of the need. Under special circumstances, Pierce County may need to pay a classification a higher rate than suggested by internal equity ratings to attract or retain qualified employees. The reason may be changes in resource availability, market demand, or special intermediate needs of the County. When the need arises for such out of class/pay rate compensation, the County should be flexible in meeting such accommodation in order to be competitive or efficient. But such special compensation should be temporary in nature and implemented only for the duration of the need. Only when there is very compelling market data, such as a benchmark being 20% or greater, above or below the market, should a pay grade adjustment be considered based on market alone. If the data for a specific classification shows a substantive difference between the market rate and the rate proposed for the job class, then a policy decision is made whether or not to make a market adjustment to the pay range that better reflects the market rate. Often these decisions are made with regard to temporary labor shortages. D. Compensation Plan In analyzing the competitiveness and usefulness of pay plans, CPS typically reviews three components: 1. Base pay structure, in terms of number of grades and steps; 2. Employee turnover and recruitment; and 3. Employee progression through the ranges and position of employees in the ranges. 50

52 1. Compensation Plan Findings Pierce County s Current Base Pay Structure The County s current management and non-represented base pay structure consists of seven pay grids that include 125 pay ranges, with 98 ranges now in use, as shown in Table 5. When initially developed more than 20 years ago, each pay grid was intended to correspond with major occupational categories. The E grid was for executive/managerial level classifications; the R grid for professional legal classifications; the K grid for professional classifications; the G grid for general classifications; and so on. Table 5: Pierce County s Current Pay Grids and Pay Ranges Pay Grid Total Ranges Ranges in Use W 5 flat rates 5 flat rates C E G K N 7 7 R 6 6 Totals *Excludes flat rates in the W pay grid. Finding D.1: The current system of grids and pay ranges (125 ranges, 98 ranges now in use) has become difficult to manage consistently and is unnecessarily complex. Over time, as the organization has increased in size and complexity, the decision of the grid on which to place jobs has become less clear and the vast number of pay grades sometimes has little dollar difference but permits the continuing creation of new titles with new grades, thus perpetuating the complexity. For example, as we noted earlier, there are at least 20 different administrative support classifications being used that are assigned to 14 different pay grades. 51

53 Moving to fewer pay grades and broader class concepts would result in five classification levels and five pay grades for the administrative support jobs. Employee Turnover Employees leave an organization for a variety of reasons such as retirement, involuntary separation, voluntary separation, family considerations, and other reasons. Employee turnover in the Western states has been quite low the past few years due to high unemployment and other economic factors. Turnover can be an indicator of how competitive wages are for a jurisdiction. High turnover may indicate a need to be more competitive. Low turnover may suggest a jurisdiction is generally competitive. Employee exit interviews are often used to assess why employees chose to leave an employer. A review of employee turnover for Pierce County in 2002 showed the highest turnover as occurring with entry-level attorneys at about 8%. Overall turnover in Pierce County was near 3%, including retirements. A survey taken on employee turnover for 2002 of municipalities in the Western states (including Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho) by the International Personnel Management Association reported an average turnover rate of about 4%. Employee Progression through the Pay Ranges There are at least three different pay range widths used among the 98 ranges, 25%, 30%, and 35%. Most pay ranges have 10 incremental steps, from the starting rate to the maximum rate. For the majority of classification, employees progress two steps each year until they reach the maximum rate of the range. Progression through a pay range is generally based on an employee s time of service in grade. Employees typically reach the top of their pay grade in five years if they start at the minimum rate of the range, and even sooner if they start somewhere within the range. Although progression in the later half of a pay range is based on meritorious service for most groups, the majority of the employees have the expectation of receiving a two step increase annually until they reach the top step of their pay range. Finding D.2: The shorter pay range widths of 25%, 30% and 35%, and the way that employees progress through a pay range, result in many employees being maxed out at the top of their salary ranges in 5 years or less. This can create pressure on the classification system to reclassify jobs in order to provide pay increases. 52

54 In traditional step compensation plans, such as the one now used by Pierce County, employees can receive the same increases regardless of performance or contribution. After a number of years employees are maxed out at the end of a pay range, and only receive across-the-board increases in the form of cost of living adjustments (COLA.) There is little distinction between good performance versus poor performance for management and employees. When employees are at the maximum pay rate, the same COLA is granted to everyone. In Pierce County, this situation has created the push for re-assigning tasks and then reclassifying the jobs, enabling those capable employees to be continued being rewarded for their good performance. An advantage of open ranges (versus steps) is that the County can make cost of living adjustments to the ranges without necessarily giving all employees automatic salary increases. Employees would receive salary increases for their performance and contribution; not for automatic cost of living adjustments. Finding D.3: The practice of automatic vs. meritorious step increases is restrictive and prohibits recognizing and rewarding variable contribution and performance. Base pay plans with incremental steps date back to the early 20 th Century when the Chicago Civil Service Commission, in 1908, adopted step plans to move away from patronage systems. Within 15 years, Chicago was followed by the State of Illinois and the federal government in adopting step pay plans to address patronage concerns, and in hopes of controlling employee wages. Over time, step plans have had the opposite effect with respect to controlling employee wages and have restricted, rather than increased, management s ability to control and management employee compensation. Incremental steps create a sense of entitlement, by employees, of moving to the next step after a certain period of time. It can create the expectation that everyone gets a raise. Although meritorious progression (as opposed to automatic progression) through the steps of a pay range has generally been the established practice for many jurisdictions, supervisors typically aren t required to differentiate between average employees versus superior ones. As a result, average becomes the performance standard rather than being able to reward employees for truly exceptional work. Most jurisdictions are moving away from bureaucratic payment systems with equal increases for all 53

55 employees, and instead are looking to provide extra rewards to employees who make exceptional contributions. 11 Public officials, private sector employers and taxpayers are increasingly questioning the practice of granting pay increases without regard to performance. The fixed step plan also denies County managers the opportunity to reward good performance. Pierce County government is committed to rewarding and retaining competent employees who achieve results in the services they provide, but technically, managers cannot do much once an employee has reached the maximum pay step. The proposed pay plan can support this goal by permitting variable pay progression based on performance, development and tenure. The proposed pay plan structures all have in common a degree of open ranges. In open ranges pay increases are variable depending on performance. While it is not CPS intent to propose a performance management plan, we want to illustrate how the proposed pay plan could support such a concept. It should be emphasized again, however, that any movement into the top variable portion of the pay structure (above the base maximum) is proposed only for those employees rated Highly Effective or Very Effective and has to be re-earned every year. Thus the movement we are discussing is an alternative to the current step increases for employees to reach the maximum of the base plan. Conceptually, pay progression through the basepay range could be based on performance, or a combination of performance and an individual employee s relative position on a pay range. For example, the County may select to give variable increases solely based on performance as illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustrative Example of Progression with Performance Performance Rating % Increase Exceptionally Effective COLA plus 6% Highly Effective COLA plus 3% Effective COLA% Somewhat Effective 0.0% An alternative is that the County could select to Ineffective 0.0% give variable increases based on a combination of tenure and position in the pay range. An illustrative example of a variable base performance pay approach is presented in Figure 5. The performance pay percentage an employee is eligible for is dependent upon the employee s 11 International Personnel Management Association, Center for Personnel Research, Pay for Performance,

56 current position in the range, e.g., Below the Midpoint, Above the Midpoint. In the example, a Highly Effective employee below the midpoint of the pay range would receive a 4% performance pay increase above COLA. Another Highly Effective employee above the midpoint of the pay range would receive a 2.5% performance pay increase above COLA. Thus, the impact of performance pay diminishes as an employee s pay progresses beyond the pay range midpoint. Figure 5: Illustrative Example of Possible Progression with Performance and Position in Grade Concept Performance Rating Below Range Midpoint Above Range Midpoint Exceptionally Effective COLA + 6.0% COLA + 4.5% Highly Effective COLA + 4.0% COLA + 2.5% Effective COLA + 2.0% COLA + 1.0% Somewhat Effective 0.0% 0.0% Ineffective 0.0% 0.0% In all these scenarios, poor performance should not be rewarded even with the COLA pay increase. 2. Compensation Plan Recommendations Recommendation D.1: Pierce County should move away from automatic step increases and consider greater recognition of performance in granting pay increases. Employee competency and proficiency produce positive results. Positive results should be recognized and rewarded. Variable progression through a pay range is one way of recognizing results. A pay plan with broader pay ranges is capable of supporting and encouraging employee competence and proficiency, and reward results. Actual movement criteria and percentages would have to be developed through a performance management plan. 55

57 Recommendation D.2: Establish a new base pay structure for Pierce County with fewer, wider pay bands consistent with the method of linking compensation to internal equity and a competitive placement within the labor market. A new pay plan with fewer pay grades is urgently needed. It is needed to reflect changes in job content, organizational and technology changes that have occurred since the last plan was adopted in A new base pay plan is needed for traditional reasons of fundamental fairness and administrative efficiency. More importantly, however, a new base pay plan is needed to support managerial accountability, organizational flexibility, and individual performance and responsibility. Like financial statements, pay and classification plans should be current in order to make sound personnel management decisions. Outdated plans, such as the one now used, lead to unfair and inconsistent results at additional cost and administrative burdens to Pierce County management. The reduced number of pay grades for the management and non-represented classification plan will make both the classification and base pay plans easier to administer, and more understandable by policy makers and employees alike. Pay Plan Structure A basic element in any personnel management system is adequate and equitable employee compensation for work performed. The classification plan linked to the base pay plan with a consistent internal equity method helps ensure fair and reliable pay for a jurisdiction. Every organization is unique. With respect to compensation plans, however, there are three goals shared by most organizations: 1. To provide internal equity through fair and consistent practices. 2. To be externally competitive with other comparable employers. 3. To be sufficiently able to attract, retain and motivate a quality work force. 56

58 Recommendations D.3: Adopt a new pay plan for management and non-represented classifications that better supports rewarding performance rather than tenure, and allows for different scenarios for progression including performance-based variable pay that must be re-earned annually. A new pay plan with fewer pay grades is urgently needed. It is needed to reflect changes in job content and organizational and technology changes that have occurred since A new base pay plan is needed for traditional reasons of fundamental fairness and administrative efficacy. More importantly, however, a new base pay plan is needed to support managerial accountability, organizational flexibility, and individual performance and responsibility. Reducing the number of pay grades, increasing the grade maximums and redefining how employees progress through a pay range could substantially ease the administration of Pierce County s salary plan for management and non-represented employees. Reducing the number of pay grades by 80% or more, together with consolidating the number of job classifications by up to a third, plus applying performance criteria for progression instead of relying mainly on tenure could yield making pay raises disguised as reclassifications, in some departments, more difficult to achieve. CPS proposes a salary structure consisting of 16 grades and having both a base pay component and a variable pay component presented as Pay Plan Option 1, in Table 6. All of the 16 grades are open ranges with a range width of 50% from the minimum base rate to the maximum variable rate. Eligibility for receiving a pay increase within the variable part of the range is based solely on performance, and further progression must be earned annually. Moreover, before an employee can progress beyond the base rate maximum, he or she must receive a performance rating of Highly Effective or higher. A performance rating of average or Effective would not qualify. There are two different range widths for the base rate part of the ranges. The first range width of 30% is intended for jobs that are recruited principally in the local Puget Sound market, and cover classifications in pay bands 1 4. The second range width is 35%, and covers those job classifications recruited locally and regionally, or occasionally nationally (pay bands 5 15.) 57

59 Only the top executive administrator, the County Executive, is in pay band 16. The 16 pay bands correspond with the 16 job bands established with the varying 35/40/45 point ranges of the recommended internal equity system. CPS also developed two other pay plan options, which are shown in Appendices J and K. Pay Plan Option 2, of Appendix J, uses incremental steps for the base pay part of the range, but the variable pay part of the range is open. Pay Plan Option 3, of Appendix K, stays with open ranges for both the base pay and variable pay parts of a range, but uses three range widths, 30%, 35% and 40% instead of the two range widths presented in our recommended plan of Pay Plan Option 1, of Table 6. Both Options 2 and 3 have 16 pay bands and rely on the 35/40/45 internal equity point ranges. 58

60 Table 6 Pay Plan Option 1 BASE PAY RANGE VARIABLE PAY RANGE Band Point Range Min Diff Base Minimum Base Midpoint Base Range Maximum Width Variable Maximum Variable Width $25,302 $ 29,097 $ 32,892 30% $ 37,952 15% % $27,199 $ 31,279 $ 35,359 30% $ 40,799 15% % $31,279 $ 35,971 $ 40,663 30% $ 46,919 15% % $35,971 $ 41,367 $ 46,762 30% $ 53,956 15% % $37,770 $ 44,379 $ 50,989 35% $ 56,654 11% % $43,435 $ 51,036 $ 58,637 35% $ 65,152 11% % $46,693 $ 54,864 $ 63,035 35% $ 70,039 11% % $50,195 $ 58,979 $ 67,763 35% $ 75,292 11% % $58,979 $ 69,300 $ 79,621 35% $ 88,468 11% % $66,351 $ 77,962 $ 89,574 35% $ 99,526 11% % $69,668 $ 81,860 $ 94,052 35% $ 104,503 11% % $73,152 $ 85,953 $ 98,755 35% $ 109,728 11% % $80,467 $ 94,549 $108,631 35% $ 120,701 11% % $86,502 $101,640 $116,778 35% $ 129,753 11% % $90,827 $106,722 $122,617 35% $ 136,241 11% % $95,369 $112,058 $128,748 35% $ 143,053 11% 59

61 VI. Recommended Approach for Implementation It has been Pierce County s focus for the overall study to gather relevant information about its classification and compensation plan. At the completion of the study, Pierce County plans to decide how best to proceed using the consultant s findings and recommendations for direction on changes that are needed to the classification plan, internal equity process, pay plan structure, and external alignment vis-à-vis relevant labor markets. The following are some implementation recommendations: 1. Impact Assessment Pierce County s management team will need to evaluate and assess the recommendations; develop implementation approach, methodologies and timeline (phase in or one-time approach); and determine the financial impact for budgeting purposes. 2. Feedback Period Pierce County may choose to establish a review and comment period during which management and non-represented employees are asked for their comments on the classification that is proposed for their individual job. Management could also use this opportunity to comment on classifications within their scope of supervisory responsibilities. 3. Interim Reclassification Pierce County Personnel Department staff will need to review CPS recommendations on specific incumbents that requested a reclassification while the review was in progress, and forward agreed recommendations to the County Executive or appropriate County official for approval. 4. Communication Plan After the County Executive has determined which recommendations in the overall plan to put forward to the County Council for appropriate action, the implementation team should prepare a communication plan for the implementation of the study. The communication plan should be targeted toward all effected personnel (management, non-represented employees) in appropriate departments and governing branches (Executive, Judicial, and Legislative.) 60

62 5. Update Classification Descriptions Pierce County Personnel will need to update written classification descriptions/specifications for management and non-represented positions based on the more current class concepts and job content collected in the review. In addition to the format consistency, this involves reducing the number of narrowly drawn classification descriptions by merging them into broader classifications when feasible; deleting those classifications that are no longer in use and likely will not be used in the immediate future; and creating new classifications that may be needed to recognize a distinct category of work that cannot reasonably be accommodated by modifying an existing classification. Although we believe the County can reduce the number of management and non-represented classifications by as much as 33%, a reasonable estimate for the Personnel Department to update the written descriptions (300+) would be at least 6 8 months, as this work would be performed in addition to the current workload of the department s professional and technical staff. Another alternative is to outsource this activity. 6. Update Personnel Policies The County will need to revise the written policies and practices of the Personnel Department that govern position reclassification to include application of PAM point factoring as a way of helping to affirm or refute substantive change in job content and therefore a sustainable basis for reclassification. 7. Develop Implement Performance Management Measurement Tools In order to adequately apply movement based on performance in the open variable ranges, the County s departments will need to have performance measurement tools to assess performance. 8. Salary Implementation on Limited Resources Implement salary adjustments in corresponding classification changes in phases if resources and/or budgeting are limited. Either implement all changes at a reduced percent of upward adjustment, or implement first the classifications with the biggest difference between current and recommended salary change upward, and the ones with a smaller degree of differences, as budget allows. CPS recommends red-circling all salary adjustments downward to preserve morale and retain quality employees until their current salary is within the appropriate salary range. 61

63 Appendices Appendix A: Position Appraisal Method Appendix B: Employers Surveyed for Phase 1 Appendix C: Employers Surveyed for Phase 2 Appendix D: Management and Non-represented Listing of Classification Titles Changes Appendix E: Proposed Occupational Index Appendix F: Glossary of Terms/Classification Terms Appendix G: Internal Equity Point Bands Appendix H: Salary Survey, Phase 1 Summary Appendix I: Salary Survey, Phase 2 Summary Appendix J: Pay Plan Option 2 Appendix K: Pay Plan Option 3 62

64 Appendix A: Position Appraisal Method I. FACTOR--KNOWLEDGE: The factor measures the familiarity, awareness, or understanding, gained through experience or study, needed to perform the work. Points Degree Definitions 1. Basic knowledge or ability to learn procedures, methods, and the use of the equipment or tools required by the job. Comment: This degree is used to measure work which requires the ability to learn how to perform routine tasks. The work should require less than a high school diploma. 2. Practical knowledge, which implies a knowledge of how to perform a task or series of related tasks according to rules, regulations, established practice or techniques, including the use of tools and equipment. Specific formal or on-thejob training is required. Comment: Here the work requires a knowledge of how to perform tasks according to set procedures. One might attain that knowledge in high school, vocational programs, or on-thejob training. 3. Specialized knowledge, which implies a knowledge of how to complete complex procedural assignments involving determination of appropriate procedures and sources of information to carry out various steps or processes; knowledge of variable procedures or processes relating to a body of standardized rules, regulations, and methods; or knowledge of basic principles, methods, practices, and procedures of an administrative or a professional field and ability to apply this knowledge in carrying out assignments, operations, and procedures. Comment: In this degree the work requires a knowledge of how to complete complex procedural assignments. This implies several years of on-the-job or vocational training, an associate s degree with some experience, or knowledge attained through completion of specific and intense training programs. 4. Knowledge of a broad array of rules, regulations, procedures, and processes or specialized knowledge of a body of rules, regulations, processes, and operations; a knowledge of basic principles, practices, and methods of an administrative or professional field and ability to apply this knowledge to assess information and situations and determine appropriate procedures and application of rules and regulations. Comment: The work here requires knowledge of how to complete a variety of complex procedural assignments which requires training or experience in the field of assignment. Typically, one would have a 63

65 bachelor s degree and some on-the-job training or experience, an associate s degree with several years of experience, or considerable experience in the field. 5. Knowledge of an extensive body of rules, procedures, or operations requiring extended training or experience to perform a wide variety of interrelated and nonstandard or atypical assignments, or conceptual and analytical knowledge, which implies a knowledge of how to select the most pertinent theory, concept, practice, or principle of a professional or administrative field and apply such to situations or problems that require consideration of both concrete and abstract or theoretical aspects. In addition, includes demonstrated skill in carrying out a full range of assignments within the field of endeavor. Comment: The work here requires either a knowledge of a vast array of rules, regulations, and procedures, requiring many years of training and work experience, or sufficient knowledge of a profession or administrative field to carry out a full range of assignments. Typically, a practitioner in a professional or administrative field would have a bachelor's degree, or equivalent, and two to three years' experience in the field. Or, such a practitioner might have a specifically relevant bachelor's or master's degree and little work experience. 6. Knowledge of advanced or a wide range of concepts, principles, and practices in an administrative or a professional field and demonstrated skill in applying this knowledge to difficult and highly complex assignments that are new, unusual, or unprecedented in nature. Comment: Here the work requires knowledge to solve difficult, unusual, complicated problems or to deal with particularly difficult cases. This level of knowledge is typically needed by a senior practitioner of an administrative or professional field. Usually, several years of professional/ administrative experience or a master's degree training with some professional/administrative experience are required. 7. Broad knowledge of the principles, concepts, and practices of an administrative or professional field in order to apply advanced, new, or broad principles, methods, policies, theories, and developments by extending existing and accepted practices or by developing new ones; or basic knowledge of managing, which implies a knowledge of principles, practices, concepts, and theories of management, including how to determine goals, staff resource needs, staff assignments, and work priorities. Comment: The work here requires a high degree of knowledge of a professional or administrative field in order to determine and put into place new or better ways to carry out the work. The work might be that of a high-level expert in a field. Such knowledge might be obtained from a doctorate program and some work experience, from a master's degree program and 64

66 two to three years of work experience, or from many years of work experience and typically a bachelor's degree. This degree also recognizes basic knowledge of management. Such knowledge is needed when a position has responsibility for supervising lower-level supervisory positions. In smaller sized departments, the position of Assistant Director may require more professional knowledge than managerial knowledge. Knowledge requirements of such positions would be reflected here. Most people learn how to be managers during many years of professional and some supervisory experience. 8. Management knowledge, which implies knowledge of how to coordinate and integrate various program activities and goals into the general mission of a major department and how to define the resources necessary to carry out a broad and complex mission. Comment: This degree reflects work which is predominantly managerial in nature. Most general department head positions and those assistant department head positions which are managers over a large program or several programs should be rated here. 9. Executive knowledge, which implies knowledge of how to manage a large, complex, multifaceted organizational component consisting of various departments or major organizational units. Such knowledge would include how to develop and implement broad policies, goals, and objectives based on shortand long-term planning as well as how to deal effectively with highly sensitive public and other jurisdiction relations. Comment: Positions or classes which serve as chief assistants to the head of the entire organization. 10. Executive knowledge, which implies knowledge of how to manage the entire organization. Such knowledge would include how to determine and implement effective policies and coordination, how to direct and carry out effective shortand long-term planning, how to make sound decisions having broad, farreaching, and critical ramifications, and how to deal effectively with highly important, controversial, and politically sensitive issues. Comment: Positions or classes at the highest organizational level should be rated here. II. Points FACTOR--SUPERVISION EXERCISED/SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY: This factor measures the depth and breadth of responsibility for one's own work product and for the work products of other employees. Degree Definitions 65

67 1. Responsible for own product. Work involves specific, routine operations and/or application of approved standards that include a few separate tasks or processes. Work comprises a segment of an assignment or project of broader scope; tasks are performed according to established routines. Comment: No supervision is involved in the work, and the work itself is basically routine without great variety. 2. Responsible for own work product. Work involves the execution of specific rules, regulations, or procedures. Work comprises a segment of an assignment or project of broader scope and allows discretion to structure tasks to meet expectations. Comment: No supervision is involved in the work. The work consists of carrying out specific rules, regulations, or procedures. The work may be part of a critical segment of a larger process. 3. Responsible for own work product and gives guidance and assistance to less knowledgeable nonprofessional employees working in the same unit or closely related area; or responsible for own work product where work involves execution of various or variable procedures or work processes. Comment: This degree recognizes the lead worker over employees who are carrying out nonprofessional or proceduraltype work. Or the work may not entail supervision but is highly variable and varied. 4. Responsible for own work product in an administrative or professional field, which includes planning, guiding, coordinating project or casework, and/or the efforts of students, clients, probationers, general public; and/or planning, directing, and coordinating the work of two or more nonprofessional employees. Work involves treating a variety of problems, questions, and situations in conformance with established criteria. Comment: This degree recognizes non-supervisory work carried out by a practitioner in a professional or administrative field. It also recognizes a supervisor over two or more nonprofessional positions. 5. Responsible for own work product in a professional or administrative field, which includes planning, guiding, coordinating project or casework, and/or the efforts of students, clients, probationers, general public; and provides guidance and assistance to less knowledgeable professional or administrative employees in the same or closely related field; or for planning, directing, and coordinating the work of more than five nonprofessional employees. 66

68 Comment: This degree recognizes the lead worker over professional or administrative employees and the supervisor over more than five nonprofessional employees. 6. Responsible for planning, directing, and coordinating a unit of two or more employees working in an administrative or a professional field; or the employee is responsible for planning, directing, and coordinating the work of nonprofessional employees through lower supervisors. The work involves establishing performance criteria, formulating projects, and assessing program effectiveness. Comment: This degree recognizes the first-line supervisor over professional or administrative positions and the second-line supervisor over nonprofessional positions. 7. Responsible for planning, directing, and coordinating two or more units of employees working in an administrative or a professional field; work involves multi-unit program coordination and the assessment of unit efforts and performance of lower-level supervisors. Comment: This degree recognizes supervision over two or more small, related units of administrative or professional employees. 8. Responsible for giving managerial direction, through subordinate supervisors, to a large number of professional or administrative employees working in related areas, or to a relatively small number of professional or administrative employees working in diverse or highly complex and critical program areas. Comment: This degree recognizes the second-line supervisor over more than two related professional/ administrative units. 9. Responsible for giving managerial direction, through subordinate managers, to a large number of professional or administrative employees working in diverse or highly complex and critical program areas. Comment: This degree recognizes supervisory responsibility over subordinate managerial positions. Many department head positions would be recognized here. 10. Responsible for providing executive direction, through subordinate department heads, in carrying out several critical and important major programs and the servicing of the general government. Comment: This degree applies to chief assistants to the head of the entire organization. 11. Responsible for providing executive direction, through subordinate executives, in the carrying out of the full scope and services of the entire organization. 67

69 Comment: This degree applies to the position of the head of the organization. III. Points FACTOR--SCOPE AND EFFECT OF DECISIONS AND ACTIONS: This factor measures the latitude for acting independently and making decisions within the context of supervision received. Degree Definitions 1. The employee receives specific assignments; the employee works as instructed and consults with the supervisor as needed on all matters not specifically covered in the original instructions. The work is normally reviewed for completeness and accuracy, or involves tasks that provide inherent checks built into the nature of the work. Comment: Here the work is closely supervised and/or the work is routine with allowance for very little deviation from established practice or procedures. The work product is or can be easily checked. 2. The employee receives continuing or individual assignments by the supervisor generally indicating work to be done, limitations, quality and quantity expected, deadlines, and priority of assignments. The supervisor gives additional specific instructions for new, difficult, or unusual assignments. The employee uses initiative in carrying out recurring assignments independently without specific instructions. The supervisor assures that the work is technically accurate and in compliance with instructions, established procedures, and guidelines. Comment: Here the employee knows the day-to-day routines, but receives instruction and closer supervisory checks on assignments which are new or different from normal. The supervisor reviews or checks such work in progress and upon completion. 3. The employee receives assignments from the supervisor, who defines objectives, priorities, and deadlines and assists the employee with unusual situations that do not have clear precedents. The employee plans and carries out successive steps and resolves problems and deviations in accordance with instructions, policies, and accepted practice. Work is reviewed for technical conformance and consistency with practice and policy. Comment: Here the supervisor defines objectives, priorities, and deadlines and lets the employee carry out the work, providing assistance as needed. Work is normally reviewed upon completion to ensure conformance with practice and policy. 4. The employee receives overall objectives and resources available. The employee and supervisor, in consultation, develop the deadlines, projects, and 68

70 work to be done. The employee plans and carries out the assignment, resolves most of the conflicts that arise, and coordinates the work with others, as necessary; also interprets policy on own initiative in terms of established objectives. The employee keeps the supervisor informed on progress, potentially controversial matters, or far-reaching implications. Comment: Here the employee (who is likely to be a supervisor) consults with his or her supervisor to work out what is to be done within the context of objectives and resources. 5. The employee receives managerial direction with assignments in terms of broad practice, precedents, policies, and goals. Work may be reviewed for fulfillment of program objectives and for conformance with department policy and practice. Comment: The employee receives direction from a manager who is either a department head or assistant department head. The employee is normally responsible for a significant program or major or critical activity of the department or major program. 6. The employee receives executive direction in terms of system-wide policy and advice for dealing with potentially major controversies, emergencies, or crises. Results of actions taken may be reviewed in terms of soundness of judgment or conformance to jurisdiction-wide policy, ethics, or law. Comment: The employee receives direction from the head of the organization. 7. The employee receives direction only from the governing body. Comment: This degree applies to the position of the head of the organization. IV. Points FACTOR--PROBLEM SOLVING AND COMPLEXITY/NATURE AND EXTENT OF GUIDELINES: This factor measures the variety, complexity, and difficulty of tasks performed and the latitude for making judgments within the context of available guidelines. Guidelines include written procedures, policies, and regulations; past practices and precedents; standard practices; and methods of a professional or administrative field. Degree Definitions 1. The employee carries out tasks that are clear cut and directly related. Actions to be taken or responses to be made are readily discernible and choices are readily apparent. Guidelines, in the form of written instructions and set or wellestablished procedures, are specific and permit very little deviation or variation in approach. Comment: This degree applies to basic or routine work which is carried out according to specific guidelines. 69

71 2. The employee performs duties which involve several related or sequential steps, processes, or operations. The judgment regarding what needs to be done involves various choices requiring the employee to recognize the existence of and differences among a few easily recognizable situations. Actions or responses to be taken require discerning differences of a factual nature, such as choosing sources of information, appropriate equipment or materials, the kind of transaction or entry. Guidelines, in the form of written instructions and established procedures, cover most aspects of the work. The employee uses judgment in locating and selecting the most appropriate guidelines, references, and procedures. Comment: This degree applies to work which is more varied or variable, but which is all basically related work. Most of the work is covered by clear guidelines. 3. The employee performs various duties involving different or unrelated processes and methods. The decision regarding what needs to be done involves evaluation of an issue or issues and may require selecting a course of action from several alternatives. The work involves conditions and elements that must be identified, analyzed, or evaluated to discern interrelationships. Guidelines are available and are applicable to major portions of the work but leave gaps in specificity. The employee uses judgment in interpreting and adapting guidelines for application to specific cases or problems. Comment: The variety of the work is greater here as the employee carries out different and unrelated processes or methods. The variety also increases the number of alternatives from which the employee must choose. Guidelines cover much of the work, but specific areas may not be covered. 4. The employee performs varied and variable duties requiring selection of different or unrelated processes or procedures, depending upon highly variable circumstances of individual cases or situations. Guidelines covering the work are highly complex, numerous, and/or are subject to continuous changes. The employee uses judgment in applying guidelines that only approximately or analogously fit particular circumstances, and he or she often must deal with emergency situations. Comment: Here there may be numerous or even conflicting guidelines--the application of which may vary greatly depending upon circumstances. Also, the guidelines may be subject to continuous change so that keeping up with changes becomes a significant or critical part of the work. 5. The employee performs varied duties requiring many different and unrelated processes, such as those relating to well-established aspects of administration or a professional field or relating to second-line supervision over complex nonprofessional work. Judgments regarding what needs to be done include the assessment of unusual circumstances, variations in approach or in incomplete or 70

72 conflicting data, the interpretations of considerable data, planning of the work, or refining the methods and techniques to be used. Guidelines exist in the form of administrative policies and precedents that are stated in general terms; or guidelines exist in the form of general and nonspecific practices of a professional or administrative field. The employee uses independent judgment, initiative, and resourcefulness in adapting such policies, precedents, and practices to specific situations or in selecting a proper course of action. Comment: This degree normally reflects standard methods, practices, and procedures used by practitioners of an administrative or professional field. It also applies to secondline supervision over complex nonprofessional work such as skilled trades. Guidelines are general and require that the employee use judgment to interpret and apply them to specific circumstances. 6. The employee performs varied duties requiring many different and unrelated processes and methods applied to difficult, complex, and/or sensitive problems relating to an administrative or professional field. Judgments regarding what needs to be done include interpretation of policy, assessment of circumstances involving conflict or divergent views, or development of new methods or techniques. Guidelines may be applied only through analogy or through identification of common aspects or applications of general policy. Comment: Here the work requires moving beyond standard practices of a professional or administrative field, in order to solve difficult, complex, and sensitive problems. Guidelines may be applicable or relevant only through analogy. 7. The employee performs varied duties requiring many different and unrelated approaches and methods applied to a broad range of activities or substantial depth of analysis, typically for administration or a professional field. Decisions regarding what needs to be done include major areas of uncertainty in approach, methods or interpretation, and evaluation processes resulting from such elements as continuing changes in program, technological development, unknown phenomena, or conflicting requirements. The work requires originating new techniques, establishing criteria, or developing new information. The employee must use a high degree of independent judgment and ingenuity in interpreting and developing guidelines and in applying such to specific areas of work. Comment: This degree applies to work that is highly innovative and experimental, or is changing continuously and significantly. Guidelines may simply not exist for major or critical aspects of the work. The work often involves developing new guidelines where none existed before or were highly inadequate. 8. The employee defines, plans, implements, and maintains broad and/or various programs and develops appropriate policies to guide subordinate managers in 71

73 carrying out the work. Guidelines consist of system- and departmental-wide policies as well as principles, practices, theories, and methods of management. Comment: This degree applies to managerial positions that have broad program responsibility. Guidelines exist in the form of policy directives and principles and practices of management. 9. The employee defines, plans, implements, coordinates, and maintains large, critical, complex, and essential public services and develops appropriate policies to guide subordinate managers in the work. Guidelines are provided in terms of broad mission statements, broad policies, and legislation. The employee must be sensitive to underlying intent in order to implement and maintain the ongoing mission(s) of department(s) or major unit(s) of a jurisdiction. Comment: This degree applies to heads of large departments or major program areas and to chief assistants to the head of the organization. 10. The work consists of the direction, coordination, planning, policy determination, and ultimate authoritative decision making for the entire organization. Guidelines in the form of legislation and higher laws state what is to be done, but how to accomplish the intent is left almost entirely to the judgment of the employee. Comment: This degree applies to the position of the head of the organization. V. FACTOR--APPLICATION OF AUTHORITY: This factor measures the authority of positions to ensure compliance with laws, codes, and prescribed standards and the type of action an employee may take when noncompliance or substandard conditions are detected. This factor does not apply to the authority exercised by supervisors over subordinates, as this is included under the factor supervision exercised. Points Degree Definitions 1. Position has responsibility for ensuring compliance with laws, codes, and standards in the performance of own work. Comment: Those positions which have little or no authority to ensure compliance, apart from one's own work, should be recognized here. 2. Position has responsibility for periodically reviewing for compliance with laws, codes, and standards but must refer situations of noncompliance to higher authority. Comment: Positions which review for compliance, but lack the authority to take action, other than referring matters to higher authority, are recognized here. Also, this factor recognizes 72

74 those positions which have secondary or minor compliance authority, but this is not a main purpose of the work. 3. Position has responsibility for assuring compliance with laws, codes, and standards and has authority to define and mandate corrective actions. Comment: Positions which have definite and principal duties having to do with ensuring compliance, and which have authority to determine and mandate corrective action to be taken over time, are recognized here. 4. Position has responsibility for assuring compliance with laws, codes, and standards and has authority to take immediate corrective actions. Comment: Positions which have ensuring compliance or enforcement of laws, codes, and standards as the primary purpose of work, and which have authority to take immediate corrective action are recognized here. 5. Position has responsibility for effecting and maintaining a program to ensure compliance with laws, codes, and standards. Comment: Positions which have responsibility for carrying out a program to ensure compliance are recognized here. These are normally supervisory or managerial positions. 6. Position has management responsibility for developing, implementing, and maintaining programs of compliance in a department whose major purpose is to ensure compliance with laws, codes, and standards. Comment: This degree recognizes managerial positions in departments whose primary purpose and focus are to ensure compliance. 7. Position has ultimate responsibility for ensuring compliance with laws, codes, and standards for the entire organization. Comment: This degree recognizes the position of the head of the organization and his chief deputy, when ultimate responsibility for ensuring compliance is shared or delegated to the chief deputy of the entire organization. VI. FACTOR--PURPOSE AND NATURE OF WORK CONTACTS: This factor measures the type, variety, and purpose of work contacts through face-to-face, telephone, or radio communications with persons other than supervisors or those supervised. Comment: The degrees are self-explanatory. Regular or usual contacts, not rare or highly exceptional ones should be considered. 73

75 Points Degree Definitions 1. Contacts with others are generally limited to the organizational unit to which assigned and are limited to furnishing, obtaining, or relaying specific, factual, and non-confidential information. Individuals making contact have limited authority and contacts are made with persons who likewise have little organizational authority. Persons contacted are generally cooperative. 2. Contacts are made with employees from other organizational units of the employer and with representatives of outside organizations and the general public. Usually the purpose of the contacts is to furnish, obtain, or relay factual information, which may require some judgment or interpretation in order to be responsive to questions or be applicable to a specific situation. Few variables or options are present, and these are clearly understood by the employee. The purpose of contacts is usually clearly understood, but some uncertainty regarding the role and authority of the employee may initially exist. The persons contacted are generally cooperative; but, in situations where this is not the case, the employee has little or no responsibility for influencing or convincing those contacted and must refer the matter to higher authority. 3. Contacts with the public, although frequent, are often not routine and may require the use of alternative approaches. Contacts tend to be focused on persons outside the employer's organization. The employee may meet with individuals or groups, and the role and authority of the parties, if initially unclear, must be identified. The purpose or objective of the contact develops during the course of the meeting or the relationship but is often intended to influence or motivate persons toward a goal. Some debate is often a characteristic of the contact. Contacts are generally, but not always, cooperative. Contact may cover material that is confidential, sensitive, or controversial, and, therefore, requires the exercise of tact. Contact is usually on behalf of the organization or others. Although the responsibility for the ultimate result of the contact may rest with others, the person making the contact has a definite definable impact on the result and can influence achievement of outcomes. 4. Contacts are regularly and frequently made at all organizational levels within and outside the employer's organization and are usually for the purpose of carrying out or otherwise achieving the organization's goals, programs, and policies. The nature of the contact may not be cooperative, but no doubt exists as to the role and authority of the employee. Usually there is a need to motivate, establish rapport, gain support, persuade, or influence individuals or groups. Likewise, there may be a need to defend, justify, negotiate, or occasionally definitively settle issues. Contacts often require tact and discretion. A requirement for interpretation of policy may exist during the course of contact. Often the employee may publicly commit the organization to a future course of action. 5. Contact is regularly with the highest appointed and elected officials or the most influential persons in the community. A requirement exists to defend, justify, negotiate, and settle highly significant or sensitive issues. Divergent viewpoints and objectives are often encountered from persons possessing equal or greater authority. Considerable skill is required in diplomacy, persuasion, and 74

76 negotiation. A developed sense of strategy and timing is an essential requirement of the work. VII. FACTOR--PHYSICAL AND SENSORY DEMANDS AND HAZARDS: This factor measures the essential and significant physical and sensory requirements of the work. It considers such requirements as unusual or prolonged physical exertion, special manual dexterity, hand and eye coordination, visual or audio acuity, fast response or reaction, and delicate and deliberate manipulations. It also measures potential hazards in the work environment. Comment: The degrees are self-explanatory. Normal or typical work environments and demands, not the highly unusual or atypical, should be considered. Points Degree Definitions 1. Work is essentially sedentary, with occasional walking and/or light lifting or other restricted physical activities. 2. Work involves frequent walking; standing; some lifting and carrying of objects of moderate weight (12-20 pounds); and/or the operation of vehicles, office, shop, or hand tools in which manipulative skills and hand-eye coordination are important ingredients of safe and/or productive operations. Injuries would generally be minor in nature, requiring first-aid attention only. Duties may require infrequent exposure to adverse weather conditions. 3. Work involves the regular, and at times sustained, performance of heavier physical tasks such as walking over rough or uneven surfaces, bending, stooping, working in confined spaces, and lifting or carrying moderately heavy (20-50 pounds) items and occasionally very heavy (100 pounds or over) items; or it may involve the complex operation of gasoline-, diesel-, or electric-powered machinery or shop equipment requiring the manipulation of multiple controls, fine adjustments, or both; or the sustained operation, on a production basis, of such office devices as typewriters, word processors, data entry devices, or offset presses with associated equipment; or work exposes the employee to potentially non-disabling injuries or illnesses which cause minimal lost time. Duties may require regular exposure to adverse weather conditions. 4. Work involves the frequent use of coordinative and manipulative skills in performing a variety of tasks with the full range of hand and power tools and shop equipment; or the skilled and complex operation of heavy equipment in work situations calling for adherence to exacting standards of depth, grade, dimensions, and contours; or work exposes employee to potentially severe injury or non-disabling illness. Duties require that work be performed in adverse weather conditions. 5. Work involves the continuous operation of hand and power tools and the full range of shop equipment to very exacting tolerances in a variety of operations. These operations call for full coordination of sensory and manipulative ability in order to achieve full production to acceptable standards. Work may involve 75

77 occasional heavy lifting or moving, but the premium is placed upon the coordinative and manipulative skills; or the work exposes the employee to potentially life-threatening situations on a recurring basis. 76

78 Appendix B: Employers Surveyed for Phase 1 Jurisdiction Population Market Surveyed King County, WA 1,741,785 Local Puget Sound Kitsap County, WA 233,372 Local Puget Sound Snohomish County, WA 622,900 Local Puget Sound Thurston County, WA 213,546 Local Puget Sound City of Bellevue, WA 109,569 Local Puget Sound City of Edmonds, WA 39,515 Local Puget Sound City of Everett, WA 91,488 Local Puget Sound City of Federal Way, WA 83,259 Local Puget Sound City of Kent, WA 79,524 Local Puget Sound City of Lakewood, WA 63,820 Local Puget Sound City of Olympia, WA 42,514 Local Puget Sound City of Puyallup, WA 34,000 Local Puget Sound City of SeaTac, WA 22,701 Local Puget Sound City of Seattle, WA 596,272 Local Puget Sound City of Tacoma, WA 193,556 Local Puget Sound Tacoma Public Utilities n/a Local Puget Sound State of Washington n/a Local Puget Sound US OPM, Region 10 n/a Local Puget Sound Number of agencies 18 Clark County, WA 360,760 Pac NW Region Public Sector Spokane County, WA 361,400 Pac NW Region Public Sector Yakima County, WA 222,581 Pac NW Region Public Sector Clackamas County, OR 346,558 Pac NW Region Public Sector Lane County, OR 324,316 Pac NW Region Public Sector Multnomah County, OR 665,810 Pac NW Region Public Sector Washington County, OR 445,342 Pac NW Region Public Sector City of Vancouver, WA 143,560 Pac NW Region Public Sector City of Boise, ID 250,738 Pac NW Region Public Sector City of Beaverton, OR 76,129 Pac NW Region Public Sector City of Gresham, OR 90,205 Pac NW Region Public Sector City of Portland, OR 529,121 Pac NW Region Public Sector State of Oregon n/a Pac NW Region Public Sector Number of agencies 13 Baltimore County, MD 762,378 National Public Sector Beaufort County, NC 44,958 National Public Sector Clark County, NV 1,464,653 National Public Sector Jefferson County, AL 659,743 National Public Sector Mobile County, AL 399,843 National Public Sector Pima County, AZ 863,049 National Public Sector Ramsey County, MN 511,035 National Public Sector St. Louis County, MO 1,016,315 National Public Sector Sacramento County, CA 1,443,741 National Public Sector Salt Lake County, UT 850,667 National Public Sector San Diego County, CA 2,813,833 National Public Sector Santa Clara County, CA 1,682,585 National Public Sector Washoe County, NV 325,000 National Public Sector City/County of Norfolk, VA 234,403 National Public Sector City of Galveston, TX 248,470 National Public Sector City of Long Beach, CA 452,000 National Public Sector City of Oakland, CA 380,000 National Public Sector East Bay Municipal Utility District, CA n/a National Public Sector Number of agencies 18 Total number of agencies surveyed 49 77

79 Appendix C: Employers Surveyed for Phase 2 12 Jurisdiction Population Market Surveyed King County, WA 1,741,785 Local Puget Sound Kitsap County, WA 233,372 Local Puget Sound Snohomish County, WA 622,900 Local Puget Sound Thurston County, WA 213,546 Local Puget Sound City of Bellevue, WA 109,569 Local Puget Sound City of Edmonds, WA 39,515 Local Puget Sound City of Everett, WA 91,488 Local Puget Sound City of Federal Way, WA 83,259 Local Puget Sound City of Kent, WA 79,524 Local Puget Sound City of Lakewood, WA 63,820 Local Puget Sound City of Olympia, WA 42,514 Local Puget Sound City of Puyallup, WA 34,000 Local Puget Sound City of SeaTac, WA 22,701 Local Puget Sound City of Seattle, WA 596,272 Local Puget Sound City of Tacoma, WA 193,556 Local Puget Sound Tacoma Public Utilities n/a Local Puget Sound State of Washington n/a Local Puget Sound US OPM, Region 10 n/a Local Puget Sound Number of agencies 18 Clark County, WA 360,760 Western Region Spokane County, WA 361,400 Western Region Yakima County, WA 222,581 Western Region Clackamas County, OR 346,558 Western Region Lane County, OR 324,316 Western Region Multnomah County, OR 665,810 Western Region Washington County, OR 445,342 Western Region City of Vancouver, WA 143,560 Western Region City of Beaverton, OR 76,129 Western Region City of Gresham, OR 90,205 Western Region City of Portland, OR 529,121 Western Region State of Oregon n/a Western Region Sacramento County, CA 1,443,741 Western Region San Diego County, CA 2,813,833 Western Region Santa Clara County, CA 1,682,585 Western Region City of Long Beach, CA 452,000 Western Region City of Oakland, CA 380,000 Western Region East Bay Municipal Utility District, CA n/a Western Region Clark County, NV 1,464,653 Western Region Washoe County, NV 325,000 Western Region Salt Lake County, UT 850,667 Western Region Pima County, AZ 863,049 Western Region Number of Agencies 22 Total number of agencies surveyed Employers responding highlighted in bold italic. 78

80 Appendix D: Management & Non-represented Listing of Proposed Classification Title Changes CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 1105 Accountant 1 GRANT ACCOUNTANT 1 GRANT ACCOUNTANT 2 ACCOUNTANT Accountant 2 ACCOUNTANT 1 FISCAL REIMBURSEMENT SUPV GRANT ACCOUNTANT Accountant 3 ACCOUNTANT Accounting Manager ACCOUNTING MANAGER 1101 Accounting Technician 1 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 1 GRANT ACCOUNTING ASST Accounting Technician 2 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 2 OPERATOR/NETWORK TECH Accounting Technician 3 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 3 GRANT ACCOUNTANT Accounting Technician 4 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 4 PAYROLL SYSTEMS COORD 1211 Administrative Assistant 1 CLERICAL AIDE DATA ENTRY TECH 1 PA LEGAL ASSISTANT COUNCIL ADMIN 1 OFFICE ASSISTANT Administrative Assistant 2 DATA ENTRY TECH 2 DATA ENTRY TECH 3 OFFICE ASSISTANT 2 COUNCIL ADMIN 2 PROGRAM ANALYST Administrative Assistant 3 ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT CONFIDENTIAL SECRETARY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY JUV COURT ADMIN SPEC COUNCIL ADMIN 3 COUNCIL ADMIN 4(B) COUNCIL LEGAL CLERK 2 OFFICE ASSISTANT Administrative Assistant 4 COMMUNICATIONS COORD SUPERVISORY ADMIN ASST COUNCIL ADMIN 4(A) OFFICE ASSISTANT Administrative Analyst ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 1785 Administrative Manager for Prosecuting Attorney ADMINISTRATIVE MGR - PA 79

81 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 1260 Administrative Program Manager JUV COURT ADMIN PROG MGR 2 JUV COURT SVCS PROG MGR ADMIN PROGRAM MGR 1 ADMIN PROGRAM MGR 2 ADMIN OFFICER 1265 Administrative Services Manager ADMIN SVCS MGR 4058 Administrative Strategic Planning Manager ADMIN/STRATEGIC PLANNING MANAGER 2075 Adoption Counselor ADOPTIONS CASEWRKR/COORD 2083 Adult Probation Officer 1 ADULT PROBATION OFFICER Adult Probation Officer 2 ADULT PROBATION OFFICER 2 ADULT PROB OFFICER 1-QPAO 2087 Adult Probation Officer 3 ADULT PROB OFFICER 2-QPAO 8007 Airport Administrator PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT COORD 8005 Airport Operations Manager AIRPORT OPERATIONS MGR 8003 Airport Maintenance Technician FACILITIES MNT TECH 1271 Arts Manager ARTS MANAGER 1650 Assistant Clerk of the Council COUNCIL DEPUTY CLERK 1 COUNCIL DEPUTY CLERK Assistant Director of Human Services HUMAN SVCS ADMIN COOR 1370 Assistant Director of Personnel ASST DIRECTOR - PERSONNEL 6090 Assistant Director of Planning & Land Services ASST DIRECTOR - PALS 1570 Assistant Fire Marshal ASST FIRE MARSHAL 2099 Assistant Juvenile Detention Manager ASST DETENTION ADMIN 1558 Assistant Risk Manager ASST RISK MANAGER 1150 Assistant to Director of Budget & Finance ASST TO DIRECTOR OF B&F 1247 Assistant to the Assessor-Treasurer ASST TO ASSESOR-TREAS 1141 Assistant to the Auditor ASST TO THE AUDITOR 1283 Assistant to the Executive ASST TO EXECUTIVE 1568 Associate Medical Examiner FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST 8028 Associate Traffic Engineer ASSOC TRAFFIC ENGINEER 1563 Autopsy Technician AUTOPSY TECHNICIAN 1301 Benefits Specialist BENEFITS SPECIALIST 1630 Boards and Commissions Clerk CLK-BNDRY RVW BD/PL COMM CLK-BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 1110 Budget Analyst BUDGET ANALYST 1115 Budget & Fiscal Manager BUDGET & FISCAL MANAGER 1116 Budget Manager BUDGET MANAGER 8010 Building Inspection Supervisor BUILDING INSPECTION SUPV 9081 Building Official BUILDING OFFCIAL 1590 Bureau Chief BUREAU CHIEF 1823 Buyer BUYER 1485 Cable Manager CABLE COORDINATOR 1480 Cable Operations Specialist 1 CABLE OPERATIONS SPEC 1482 Cable Operations Specialist 2 CABLE OPERATIONS SPEC 2015 Calendar Coordinator CALENDAR COORDINATOR 1583 Captain CAPTAIN 7027 Case Manager Supervisor CASE MANAGER SUPERVISOR 1120 Cash Management Officer CASH MANAGEMENT OFFICER 80

82 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 1763 Chief Criminal Investigator CHIEF CRIMINAL INVESTIGTR 1248 Chief Deputy, Assessor-Treasurer DEPUTY ASSESSOR - TREAS 1779 Chief Deputy Attorney CHIEF DEPUTY ATTORNEY 2027 Chief Deputy, Clerk of Superior Court ASST DIR - CLERK 1330 Chief Examiner CHIEF EXAMINER 1565 Chief Medical Investigator CHIEF MEDICAL INVESTIGTR 7060 Chief of Clinical Services CHIEF OF CLINICAL SERVICES 1290 Chief of Staff CHIEF OF STAFF 8029 Civil Engineer 4 CIVIL ENGINEER Claims and Safety Technician CLAIMS & SAFETY TECHNICIAN 2028 Clerk of Superior Court CLERK 1653 Clerk of the Council CLERK TO THE COUNCIL 1915 Clinical Dietician CLINICAL DIETICIAN 6030 Code Enforcement Supervisor CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPV 1501 Communications Equipment Installer COMMUNICATIONS EQP INSTLR 3015 Community Action Coordinator 1 COMMUNITY ACTION COORD Community Action Coordinator 2 COMMUNITY ACTION COORD Community Center Manager COMMUNITY CENTER MANAGER 5005 Community Center Shift Supervisor COMMUNITY CENTER REC COOR 1413 Community Education Program Supervisor PUBLIC INFORMATION SPEC 1410 Community Program Educator COMMUNITY PROGRAM EDUCATOR E911 PROGRAM EDUCATOR 3007 Community Services Resource Developer COMMUNITY SVCS RES DEVLPR 8021 Construction Project Coordinator 1 CONSTRUCTION PROJ COORD PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT COORD 8022 Construction Project Coordinator 2 CONTRACTS/PROJECTS COORD WW CONSTRUCTION PROJ MGR 8023 Construction Project Manager CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MGR 1815 Contract Compliance Officer CONTRACT COMPLIANCE OFCR 1813 Contract Compliance Specialist CONTRACT COMPL FIELD MNTR CONTRACT COMPLIANCE SPEC 1 CONTRACT COMPLIANCE SPEC Contract Services Manager CONTRACT SERVICES MANAGER 1584 Correctional Captain CORRECTIONAL CAPTAIN 1665 Council Admin for Committees & Research COUNCIL POLICY & RESEARCH ADMIN 1667 Council Admin for Legal & Operations COUNCIL LEGAL Crime Victims Advocate 1 VICTIM-WITNESS PROG COORD VICTIM-WITNESS PROG SPEC SENIOR ADVO/VOL SVCS COORD 1756 Crime Victims Advocate 2 VICTIM-WITNESS PROG COORD 1760 Criminal Investigator CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR 1655 Councilmember Assistant COUNCILMEMBER ASSISTANT 1771 County Attorney 1 COUNTY ATTORNEY County Attorney 2 COUNTY ATTORNEY County Attorney 3 COUNTY ATTORNEY County Attorney 4 COUNTY ATTORNEY County Engineer COUNTY ENGINEER 1292 County Executive EXECUTIVE 81

83 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 8015 Custodian CUSTODIAN Courier COURIER 2010 Court Reporter COURT REPORTER COURT REPORTER, MANAGING 1143 Deputy Auditor DEPUTY AUDITOR 2042 Deputy Director of District Court Probation DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIST CT PROB 9090 Deputy Director of Public Works & Utilities DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PW&U 2035 Deputy Superior Court Administrator DEPUTY COURT ADMINISTRATOR 6070 Development Engineering Supervisor DEVEL ENGINEERING SUPV 1790 Director of Assigned Council DIR - ASSIGN COUNCIL 1160 Director of Budget & Finance DIR - BUDGET & FINANCE 1470 Director of Communications DIR - COMMUNICATIONS 3050 Director of Community Services DIR - COMMUNITY SERVICES 2043 Director of District Court Probation DIR - DISTRICT COURT PROBATION 1540 Director of Emergency Management DIR - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 8020 Director of Facilities Management DIR - FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 1640 Director of Government Relations DIR - GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 7095 Director of Human Services DIR - HUMAN SERVICES 4080 Director of Information Services DIR - INFORMATION SERVICES 5040 Director of Parks & Recreation DIR - PARKS & RECREATION 1375 Director of Personnel DIR - PERSONNEL 6095 Director of Planning & Land Services DIR - PLANNING & LAND SERVICES 9092 Director of Public Works & Utilities DIR - PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 2040 District Court Administrator DIST CT #1 -ADMINISTRATOR 2039 District Court Division Manager DIST CT #1-CIVIL DIV ADMINISTRATOR DIST CT #1 MGR-ADMIN SVCS DIST CT #1 MGR-CRIMINL DIV 2051 Diversion Counselor 1 DIVERSION COUNSELOR Diversion Counselor 2 DIVERSION COUNSELOR Domestic Violence Coordinator DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COORD 2077 Drug & Alcohol Counselor 1 DRUG/ALCOHOL COUNSELOR Drug & Alcohol Counselor 2 DRUG/ALCOHOL COUNSELOR Drug & Alcohol Supervisor DRUG/ALCOHOL SUPERVISOR 1510 E911 Program Manager E911 PROGRAM MANAGER 3012 Economic Development Manager ECOMOMIC DEVEL MGR 3009 Economic Development Specialist 1 ECONOMIC DEVEL SPECIALIST 3010 Economic Development Specialist 2 SPEC ASST/EXEC-BUSINESS 1343 EEO/ADA Specialist EEO OFFICER 1344 EEO Training/Employee Development Specialist 1503 Emergency Communications Technician COMMUNICATIONS TECH Emergency Management Program Manager EMERGENCY MGT PROGRAM MGR 1505 Emergency Program Coordinator EMERGENCY MGT COORD Energy Resource Specialist ENERGY RESOURCE SPEC 9077 Environmental Biologist 3 ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST Environmental Educator ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATOR 8061 Equipment Operation Instructor EQUIPMENT OPER INSTRUCTOR TRAINING COORDINATOR 8065 Equipment Services Manager EQUIPMENT SVC MANAGER 82

84 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 8063 Equipment Services Supervisor EQUIPMENT SUPERVISOR 1275 Executive Aide EXECUTIVE AIDE 1230 Executive Administrative Assistant ASST TO SHERIFF EXECUTIVE SECRETARY 8019 Facilities Maintenance Manager BUILDING MAINT SUPT 8018 Facilities Maintenance Supervisor COMMUNICATION TECH Facilities Maintenance Coordinator CUSTODIAL SUPERVISOR FACILITIES SERVICES COORDINATOR 3045 Family Resources Program Supervisor PROGRAM SPECIALIST Family Resource Specialist 1 PROGRAM AIDE 3041 Family Resource Specialist 2 FAMILY RESOURCE SPEC Family Resource Specialist 3 FAMILY EDUCATOR COMMUNITY SVCS EMPLY SPEC FAMILY RESOURCE SPEC Fire Marshal FIRE MARSHAL 1112 Fiscal Services Manager FISCAL SERVICES MGR 1920 Food Service Manager FOOD SERVICE MANAGER 1567 Forensic Investigation Manager FORENSIC INVESTIGATION MANAGER 8075 General Service Supervisor GENERAL SERVICES SUPV 4065 GIS Manager GIS MANAGER 5025 Golf Supervisor GOLF SUPERVISOR 1620 Government Relations Coordinator GOVT RELATIONS COORD 7088 Health Records Information Supervisor HEALTH INFORMATION SUPV 7087 Health Records Information Technician REGISTERED HLTH INFO TECH 7090 Health Services Manager HEALTH SERVICES MANAGER 2055 Home Detention Monitor CASE AIDE MONITOR 3029 Housing Rehabilitation Inspector HOUSING REHAB SPECIALIST 1349 Human Resource Manager HUMAN RESOURCE MGR-PA 5019 Ice Skating Program Coordinator ICE SKATING COORDINATOR 5017 Ice Skating Program Supervisor ICE SKATE PROGRAM COORD 4010 Information Technology Resource Specialist 1 DEPT INFO TECH SPEC 1 DEPT INFO TECH SPEC 2 INFORMATION TECH SPEC 1 GIS SPECIALIST PROGRAM ANALYST 2 PROGRAM ANALYST Information Technology Resource Specialist 2 DEPT INFO TECH SPEC 2 DEPT INFO TECH SPEC 3 GIS SPECIALIST INFORMATION TECH SPEC Information Technology Resource Specialist 3 INFORMATION TECH SPEC Information Technology Resource Specialist 4 DEPT INFO TECH SPEC 3 GIS PROJECT COORDINATOR INFORMATION TECH SPEC Information Technology Resource Technician 1 CARTOGRAPHER 1 HELP DESK SPECIALIST 1 INFORMATION TECH TRAINEE OPERATOR/NETWORK TECH 1 83

85 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES OPERATOR/NETWORK TECH Information Technology Resource Technician 2 GIS CARTOGRAPHER 2 CARTOGRAPHER 2 GIS TECHNICIAN HELP DESK SPECIALIST 2 OPERATOR/NETWORK TECH 3 TELECOMMUNICATIONS COORD TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECH 4005 Information Technology Resource Technician 3 TELECOMM NETWORK SPEC 1130 Internal Auditor 1 INTERNAL AUDITOR Internal Auditor 2 INTERNAL AUDITOR Interpreter/Coordinator INTERPRETER/COORDINATOR 1758 Investigator and Process Server INVEST/PROCESS SRVR 1 INVEST/PROCESS SRVR Judicial Assistant-District Court JUDICIAL ASST-DISTRICT CT 2022 Judicial Assistant-Superior Court JUDICIAL ASST-SUPERIOR CT JUV COURT SERVICES ASST 2045 Justice Services Manager JUSTICE SERVICES MGR-PA 2033 Juvenile Court Administrator JUVENILE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2097 Juvenile Detention Manager ASST ADMIN-DET/FACILITIES 2061 Juvenile Intake Screener LEGAL ASSISTANT 2 LEGAL ASSISTANT Juvenile Probation Counselor JUV PROB COUNSELOR 1 JUV PROB COUNSELOR 2 JUV DIVERSION COORDINATOR 2071 Juvenile Probation Manager ASST ADMIN-PROBATION SVCS 2069 Juvenile Probation Supervisor JUV PROB COUNSELOR Kitchen Supervisor COOK 2 COOK Labor Relations Analyst 1 LABOR RELATIONS ANALYST Labor Relations Analyst 2 LABOR RELATIONS ANALYST Labor Relations Manager LABOR RELATIONS MANAGER 6085 Land Development Center Manager PERMIT/DEV CENTER SUPV 6083 Land Development Center Supervisor PERMIT COORDINATOR SUPV 5023 Landscape Supervisor GARDENER Legal Assistant 2 LEGAL ASSISTANT 1 LEGAL ASSISTANT Legal Assistant 3 LEGAL ASSISTANT Legal Assistant 4 LEGAL ASSISTANT Legal Assistant Supervisor LEGAL ASSISTANT Legal Interviewer LEGAL INTERVIEWER 1723 Legal Interviewer Specialist LEGAL INTERVIEWER SPEC 1725 Legal Interviewer Supervisor LEGAL INTERVIEWER SUPV 1731 Legal Process Assistant 2 LEGAL PROC ASST 2-DC3/PRO 1733 Legal Process Assistant 3 LEGAL PROC ASST 3-DC34PRO 1735 Legal Process Supervisor LEGAL PROC SUPV-CLERK 3021 Loan Officer 1 HOUSING REHAB LOAN OFCR 84

86 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 3022 Loan Officer 2 LOAN OFFICER 1203 Mail Services Clerk MAIL SERVICES CLERK 9088 Maintenance Manager MAINTENANCE MGR 1585 Major MAJOR 1801 Material Control Specialist 1 MATERIAL MGMT CLERK PARTS SPECIALIST Material Control Specialist 2 PARTS SPECIALIST 2 MATERIAL MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT WW INVENTORY EXPEDITOR 1803 Material Control Specialist 3 PARTS SPECIALIST LEAD 7094 Medical Director of PSBH MEDICAL DIRECTOR 1569 Medical Examiner MEDICAL EXAMINER 7061 Mental Health Care Coordinator 1 MENTAL HEALTH EVAL SPEC 1 MENTAL HEALTH THERAPIST PROGRAM SPECIALIST Mental Health Care Coordinator 2 PROGRAM SPECIALIST Mental Health Manager MENTAL HEALTH MANAGER 1740 Mitigation Specialist/Investigative Administrator MITIGATN SPEC/INVSGTV ADM 7059 Nurse Administrator NURSE ADMINISTRATOR 7057 Nurse Manager PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES SUPV 7044 Nurse Practitioner NURSE PRACTITIONER (ARNP) 7046 Nurse Practitioner Supervisor MOBILE OUTRCH/CRISIS COORD 7048 Nursing Clinic Coordinator MEDICAL SERVICES COORD 7049 Nursing Services Educator PSYCHIATRIC SVCS COORD 7050 Nurse Supervisor NURSE SUPERVISOR - CORRECTIONS 7055 Nursing Shift Supervisor REGISTERED NURSE SUP - PSBH 1921 Nutritional Service Manager NUTRITIONAL SVCS SUPV 4030 Operations Supervisor OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 1710 Paralegal PARALEGAL 1 PARALEGAL Parks and Recreation Planner PARKS & REC PLANNER 5029 Parks Superintendent SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS 5027 Parks Supervisor PARKS SUPERVISOR 4050 PC & Network Services Manager PC & NETWORK SVCS MANAGER 1670 Performance Auditor COUNCIL RESEARCH 2 (PERF AUDIT) 1672 Performance Audit Coordinator COUNCIL RESEARCH 4 (PERF AUDIT) 6081 Permit Counter Supervisor PERMIT/DEV CTR CTR OPS SU 1322 Personnel Analyst 1 PERSONNEL SPECIALIST 1324 Personnel Analyst 2 PERSONNEL ANALYST 7083 Pharmacist 7084 Pharmacy Coordinator PHARMACY SUPERVISOR STAFF PHARMACIST/MANAGER 7041 Physician Assistant PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT - PSBH 7088 Physician/Medical Director PHYSICIAN/MEDICAL DIRECTOR 6003 Planner 1 PLANNER Planner 2 PLANNER Planner 3 PLANNER Planner 4 PLANNER 4 85

87 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 6040 Plans Examiner Supervisor PLANS EXAMINER SUPV 4055 Production Services Manager PRODUCTION SERVICES MANAGER 1401 Public Information Assistant PUBLIC INFORMATION ASST 8025 Public Works Supervisor 1 PUBLIC WORKS SUPV Public Works Supervisor 2 PUBLIC WORKS SUPV Purchasing Agent PURCHASING AGENT 7073 Quality Improvement Coordinator MENTAL HLTH QA MGT COORD 1205 Records Center Assistant RECORDS CENTER ASSISTANT 1207 Records Specialist RECORDS SPECIALIST 5030 Recreation Superintendent RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT 5015 Recreation Supervisor RECREATION SUPERVISOR 1660 Research Analyst COUNCIL RESEARCH 1 COUNCIL RESEARCH Restitution Coordinator RESTITUTION COORDINATOR 1127 Revenue & Investment Manager REVENUE & INVESTMENT MANAGER 1554 Risk Investigator 1 RISK INVESTIGATOR Risk Investigator 2 RISK INVESTIGATOR Risk Manager RISK MANAGER 8070 Road Maintenance Manager ROAD MAINTENANCE SUPT 1557 Safety Officer SAFETY OFFICER 1825 Senior Buyer SENIOR BUYER 1580 Senior Property Room Officer SENIOR PROPERTY ROOM OFFICER 1662 Senior Research Analyst COUNCIL LEGAL 1 COUNCIL RESEARCH 3 COUNCIL RESEARCH Sheriff SHERIFF 7031 Social Assistance Program Administrator 1 PROGRAM COORDINATOR 1 PROGRAM COORDINATOR Social Assistance Program Administrator 2 PROGRAM COORDINATOR 1 MENTAL HEALTH CORR COORD 7011 Social Assistance Program Coordinator 1 HUMAN SERVICES PLANNER 2 PROGRAM SPECIALIST 1 DWI PROGRAM COORDINATOR LONG TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN MENTAL HEALTH OMBUDSMAN PROGRAM SPECIALIST Social Assistance Program Coordinator 2 PROGRAM SPECIALIST 3 VETERANS PROGRAM COORD 7015 Social Assistance Program Coordinator 3 PROGRAM COORDINATOR Social Assistance Program Manager CRISIS & COMM SVCS COORD 7003 Social Assistance Program Specialist MENTAL HEALTH QUALTY RVWR 4060 Software Development Manager SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT MGR 9083 Solid Waste Administrator SOLID WASTE ADMINISTRATOR 8090 Solid Waste Recycling Analyst SOLID WASTE RECYC ANALYST 9080 Special Assistant to the Dir of Public Works & Utilities SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE DIR OF PW&U 1285 Special Assistant to the Executive SPECIAL ASST TO EXEC 1280 Special Projects Coordinator SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR 7091 Staff Physician STAFF PHYSICIAN - PSBH 86

88 CODE PROPOSED TITLES CURRENT TITLES 7092 Staff Psychiatrist STAFF PSYCHIATRIST - PSBH 2037 Superior Court Administrator SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR 4040 Telecommunications Coordinator TELECOMMUNICATIONS COORD 4042 Telecommunications Supervisor COMMUNICATIONS SUPV - IS 7079 Therapeutic Recreational Supervisor RECREATION THERAPIST 8030 Traffic Engineer TRAFFIC ENGINEER 8035 Traffic Operations Supervisor TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SUPV 1347 Training & Development Manager ORGANIZATIONAL DEVEL MGR 1345 Training & Development Specialist TRAINING & DEVEL SPEC 1560 Transport Agent TRANSPORT AGENT 8040 Transportation Program Development Manager PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT MGR 7085 Utilization Review Technician UTILIZATION REVIEW TECH 2093 Volunteer Services Coordinator VOLUNTEER SERVICES MGR 9071 Water Programs Maintenance Manager WATER PROGRAMS MAINT MGR 9084 Water Programs Manager WATER PROGRAMS MGR 9078 Water Quality Specialist WATER QUALITY SPECIALIST 3019 Weatherization Technician WEATHERIZATION TECHNICIAN 1303 Wellness Coordinator WELLNESS COORDINATOR 2081 Work Crew Supervisor JUV COURT COM SVC WC OFCR WORK CREW SUPERVISOR 9020 WW Assistant Collection System Manager WW ASST COLL SYSTEM MGR 9021 WW Collection System Manager WW COLLECTION SYSTEM MGR 9009 WW Maintenance Specialist WW MAINT SPEC-ELEC WW MAINT SPEC-MECH WW MAINT SPEC-INST 9011 WW Maintenance Supervisor 1 WW COLL MAINT TECH LEAD 9013 WW Maintenance Supervisor 2 WW COLL MAINT SUPV 9005 WW Maintenance Worker WW MAINTENANCE WORKER 9007 WW Maintenance Technician WW MAINT TECH 9087 WW Utility Manager WW UTILITY MGR 9057 WWTP Chief Operator WWTP CHIEF OPERATOR 9033 WWTP Engineer WWTP ENGINEER 9035 WWTP Laboratory Analyst WWTP LAB ANALYST 9037 WWTP Laboratory Supervisor WWTP LAB SUPERVISOR 9039 WWTP Laboratory Technician WWTP LABORATORY TECH 9041 WWTP Maintenance Supervisor WWTP MAINT SUPV 9051 WWTP Operator 1 WWTP OPERATOR WWTP Operator 2 WWTP OPERATOR WWTP Operator 3 WWTP OPERATOR WWTP Pretreatment Technician WWTP PRETREATMENT TECH 9082 WWTP Superintendent WWTP SUPERINTENDENT 9061 WWTP Utility Worker WWTP UTILITY WORKER 87

89 Appendix E: Proposed Occupational Index, Management & Nonrepresented Classes NUMBER CLASS TITLE ACCOUNTING & FISCAL CONTROL SERIES 1101 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING MANAGER 1110 BUDGET ANALYST 1112 FISCAL SERVICES MANAGER 1115 BUDGET & FISCAL MANAGER 1116 BUDGET MANAGER 1120 CASH MANAGEMENT OFFICER 1127 REVENUE AND INVESTMENT MANAGER 1130 INTERNAL AUDITOR INTERNAL AUDITOR ASSISTANT TO THE AUDITOR 1143 DEPUTY AUDITOR 1150 ASSISTANT TO DIRECTOR OF BUDGET & FINANCE 1160 DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND FINANCE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT & MANAGEMENT SERIES 1201 COURIER 1203 MAIL SERVICES CLERK 1205 RECORDS CENTER ASSISTANT 1207 RECORDS SPECIALIST 1211 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 3 88

90 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 1217 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 1247 ASSISTANT TO THE ASSESSOR-TREASURER 1248 CHIEF DEPUTY, ASSESSOR-TREASURER 1250 ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 1260 ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM MANAGER 1265 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER 1271 ARTS MANAGER COUNTY EXECUTIVE & RELATED SERIES 1275 EXECUTIVE AIDE 1280 SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR 1283 ASSISTANT TO THE EXECUTIVE 1285 SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE EXECUTIVE 1290 CHIEF OF STAFF 1292 COUNTY EXECUTIVE HUMAN RESOURCES SERIES 1301 BENEFITS SPECIALIST 1303 WELLNESS COORDINATOR 1310 LABOR RELATIONS ANALYST LABOR RELATIONS ANALYST LABOR RELATIONS MANAGER 1322 PERSONNEL ANALYST PERSONNEL ANALYST CHIEF EXAMINER 1343 EEO/ADA SPECIALIST 1344 EEO TRAINING/EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST 1345 TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST 1347 TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 1349 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGER 1370 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL 1375 DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL PUBLIC INFORMATION SERIES 1401 PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANT 1410 COMMUNITY PROGRAM EDUCATOR 89

91 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 1413 COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 1450 ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATOR 1470 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS CABLE SERIES 1480 CABLE OPERATIONS SPECIALIST CABLE OPERATIONS SPECIALIST CABLE MANAGER EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS SERIES 1501 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT INSTALLER 1503 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN 1505 EMERGENCY PROGRAM COORDINATOR 1510 E911 PROGRAM MANAGER 1530 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MANAGER 1540 DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT RISK MANAGEMENT RELATED SERIES 1550 CLAIMS & SAFETY TECHNICIAN 1554 RISK INVESTIGATOR RISK INVESTIGATOR SAFETY OFFICER 1558 ASSISTANT RISK MANAGER 1559 RISK MANAGER MEDICAL EXAMINER SERIES 1560 TRANSPORT AGENT 1563 AUTOPSY TECHNICIAN 1565 CHIEF MEDICAL INVESTIGATOR 1567 FORENSIC INVESTIGATION MANAGER 1568 ASSOCIATE MEDICAL EXAMINER 1569 MEDICAL EXAMINER FIRE & PUBLIC SAFETY SERIES 1570 ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL 1575 FIRE MARSHAL 1580 SENIOR PROPERTY ROOM OFFICER 1583 CAPTAIN 1584 CORRECTIONAL CAPTAIN 1585 MAJOR 1590 BUREAU CHIEF 1595 SHERIFF 90

92 NUMBER CLASS TITLE GOVERNMENT RELATIONS SERIES 1620 GOVERNMENT RELATIONS COORDINATOR 1630 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CLERK 1640 DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS COUNTY COUNCIL & RELATED SERIES 1650 ASSISTANT CLERK OF THE COUNCIL 1653 CLERK OF THE COUNCIL 1655 COUNCILMEMBER ASSISTANT 1660 RESEARCH ANALYST 1662 SENIOR RESEARCH ANALYST 1665 COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR FOR COMMITTEES & RESEARCH 1667 COUNCIL ADMINISTRATOR FOR LEGAL & OPERATIONS 1670 PERFORMANCE AUDITOR 1672 PERFORMANCE AUDIT COORDINATOR LEGAL SERIES 1701 LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL ASSISTANT LEGAL ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR 1710 PARALEGAL 1721 LEGAL INTERVIEWER 1723 LEGAL INTERVIEWER SPECIALIST 1725 LEGAL INTERVIEWER SUPERVISOR 1731 LEGAL PROCESS ASSISTANT LEGAL PROCESS ASSISTANT LEGAL PROCESS SUPERVISOR 1740 MITIGATION SPECIALIST/INVESTIGATIVE ADMINISTRATOR 1755 CRIME VICTIMS ADVOCATE CRIME VICTIMS ADVOCATE INVESTIGATOR AND PROCESS SERVER 1760 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR 1763 CHIEF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR 1771 COUNTY ATTORNEY COUNTY ATTORNEY COUNTY ATTORNEY COUNTY ATTORNEY 4 91

93 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 1779 CHIEF DEPUTY ATTORNEY 1785 ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGER FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 1790 DIRECTOR OF ASSIGNED COUNSEL STORES & PURCHASING SERIES 1801 MATERIAL CONTROL SPECIALIST MATERIAL CONTROL SPECIALIST MATERIAL CONTROL SPECIALIST CONTRACT COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST 1815 CONTRACT COMPLIANCE OFFICER 1820 CONTRACT SERVICES MANAGER 1823 BUYER 1825 SENIOR BUYER 1835 PURCHASING AGENT DIETARY & FOOD SERVICE SERIES 1913 KITCHEN SUPERVISOR 1915 CLINICAL DIETICIAN 1920 FOOD SERVICE MANAGER 1921 NUTRITIONAL SERVICE MANAGER COURT/PROBATION SERIES 2010 COURT REPORTER 2015 CALENDAR COORDINATOR 2020 JUDICIAL ASSISTANT-DISTRICT COURT 2022 JUDICIAL ASSISTANT-SUPERIOR COURT 2025 INTERPRETER/COORDINATOR 2027 CHIEF DEPUTY, CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 2028 CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 2033 JUVENILE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2035 DEPUTY SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2037 SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2039 DISTRICT COURT DIVISION MANAGER 2040 DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2042 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF DISTRICT COURT PROBATION 2043 DIRECTOR OF DISTRICT COURT PROBATION 92

94 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 2045 JUSTICE SERVICES MANAGER 2051 DIVERSION COUNSELOR DIVERSION COUNSELOR HOME DETENTION MONITOR 2061 JUVENILE INTAKE SCREENER 2065 JUVENILE PROBATION COUNSELOR 2069 JUVENILE PROBATION SUPERVISOR 2071 JUVENILE PROBATION MANAGER 2075 ADOPTION COUNSELOR 2077 DRUG & ALCOHOL COUNSELOR DRUG & ALCOHOL COUNSELOR DRUG & ALCOHOL SUPERVISOR 2081 WORK CREW SUPERVISOR 2083 ADULT PROBATION OFFICER ADULT PROBATION OFFICER ADULT PROBATION OFFICER RESTITUTION COORDINATOR 2093 VOLUNTEER SERVICES COORDINATOR 2095 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COORDINATOR 2097 JUVENILE DETENTION MANAGER 2099 ASSISTANT JUVENILE DETENTION MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/SERVICES SERIES 3007 COMMUNITY SERVICE RESOURCES DEVELOPER 3009 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 3015 COMMUNITY ACTION COORDINATOR COMMUNITY ACTION COORDINATOR WEATHERIZATION TECHNICIAN 3020 ENERGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST 3021 LOAN OFFICER LOAN OFFICER HOUSING REHABILIATION INSPECTOR 93

95 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 3040 FAMILY RESOURCE SPECIALIST FAMILY RESOURCE SPECIALIST FAMILY RESOURCE SPECIALIST FAMILY RESOURCES PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 3050 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERIES 4001 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE TECHNICIAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE TECHNICIAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE TECHNICIAN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 4040 TELECOMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR 4042 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR 4050 PC & NETWORK SERVICES MANAGER 4055 PRODUCTION SERVICES MANAGER 4058 ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGIC PLANNING MANAGER 4060 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 4065 GIS MANAGER 4080 DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION SERVICES PARKS & RECREATION SERIES 5003 COMMUNITY CENTER MANAGER 5005 COMMUNITY CENTER SHIFT SUPERVISOR 5015 RECREATION SUPERVISOR 5017 ICE SKATE PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 5019 ICE SKATING PROGRAM COORDINATOR 5021 PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNER 5023 LANDSCAPE SUPERVISOR 5025 GOLF SUPERVISOR 5027 PARKS SUPERVISOR 5029 PARKS SUPERINTENDENT 94

96 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 5030 RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT 5040 DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNING SERIES 6003 PLANNER PLANNER PLANNER PLANNER CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR 6040 PLANS EXAMINER SUPERVISOR 6070 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR 6081 PERMIT COUNTER SUPERVISOR 6083 LAND DEVELOPMENT CENTER SUPERVISOR 6085 LAND DEVELOPMENT CENTER MANAGER 6090 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND LAND SERVICES 6095 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND LAND SERVICES SOCIAL ASSISTANCE, HEALTH & HOSPITAL SERIES 7003 SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM SPECIALIST 7011 SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM MANAGER 7027 CASE MANAGER SUPERVISOR 7031 SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF HUMAN SERVICES 7041 PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 7044 NURSE PRACTITIONER 7046 NURSE PRACTITIONER SUPERVISOR 7048 NURSING CLINIC COORDINATOR 7049 NURSING SERVICES EDUCATOR 7050 NURSE SUPERVISOR 7055 NURSING SHIFT SUPERVISOR 7057 NURSE MANAGER 7059 NURSE ADMINISTRATOR 95

97 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 7060 CHIEF OF CLINICAL SERVICES 7061 MENTAL HEALTH CARE COORDINATOR MENTAL HEALTH CARE COORDINATOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT COORDINATOR 7079 THERAPEUTIC RECREATIONAL SUPERVISOR 7083 PHARMACIST 7084 PHARMACY COORDINATOR 7085 UTILIZATION REVIEW TECHNICIAN 7087 HEALTH RECORDS INFORMATION TECHNICIAN 7088 HEALTH RECORDS INFORMATION SUPERVISOR 7089 PHYSICIAN/MEDICAL DIRECTOR 7090 HEALTH SERVICES MANAGER 7091 STAFF PHYSICIAN 7092 STAFF PSYCHIATRIST 7093 MENTAL HEALTH MANAGER 7094 MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF PSBH 7095 DIRECTOR OF HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS, ENGINEERING, MAINTENANCE & TRADES SERIES 8003 AIRPORT MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN 8005 AIRPORT OPERATIONS MANAGER 8007 AIRPORT ADMINISTRATOR 8010 BUILDING INSPECTION SUPERVISOR 8015 CUSTODIAN 8017 FACILITIES MAINTENANCE COORDINATOR 8018 FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR 8019 FACILITIES MAINTENANCE MANAGER 8020 DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 8021 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COORDINATOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COORDINATOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER 8025 PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR ASSOCIATE TRAFFIC ENGINEER 8029 CIVIL ENGINEER TRAFFIC ENGINEER 8035 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 96

98 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 8040 TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 8061 EQUIPMENT OPERATION INSTRUCTOR 8063 EQUIPMENT SERVICES SUPERVISOR 8065 EQUIPMENT SERVICES MANAGER 8070 ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGER 8075 GENERAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR 8090 SOLID WASTE RECYCLING ANALYST WATER & WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERIES 9005 WW MAINTENANCE WORKER 9007 WW MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN 9009 WW MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST 9011 WW MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR I 9013 WW MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR WW ASSISTANT COLLECTION SYSTEM MANAGER 9021 WW COLLECTION SYSTEM MANAGER 9033 WWTP ENGINEER 9035 WWTP LABORATORY ANALYST 9037 WWTP LABORATORY SUPERVISOR 9039 WWTP LABORATORY TECHNICIAN 9041 WWTP MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR 9051 WWTP OPERATOR WWTP OPERATOR WWTP OPERATOR WWTP CHIEF OPERATOR 9059 WWTP PRETREATMENT TECHNICIAN 9061 WWTP UTILITY WORKER 9071 WATER PROGRAMS MAINTENANCE MANAGER 9077 ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST WATER QUALITY SPECIALIST PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES MANAGEMENT SERIES 9080 SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 9081 BUILDING OFFICIAL 9082 WWTP SUPERINTENDENT 9083 SOLID WASTE ADMINISTRATOR 9084 WATER PROGRAMS MANAGER 9085 COUNTY ENGINEER 9087 WW UTILITY MANAGER 97

99 NUMBER CLASS TITLE 9088 MAINTENANCE MANAGER 9090 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 9092 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 98

100 Appendix F: Glossary of Terms/Classification Terms Allocation to class. In classification terminology, the term "allocation" is applied to indicate the formal establishment of a position under the classification plan. On the basis of the duties and responsibilities, each position is "allocated" to the appropriate class, within the proper occupational area and class series, taking automatically the salary range assigned to the class. The allocation is determined on the basis of an appraisal of the duties and responsibilities of the position, according to established standards. Positions are allocated to a class based on similarity in duties and responsibilities to ensure internal equity. Positions grouped in the same class should meet three tests: 1) Can a common class title be used that is appropriate for the positions allocated to the class? 2) Can the same general type of training, experience, and knowledge be required for people working in the positions assigned to the class? 3) Can the same pay range be applied fairly to all positions allocated to the class? Any one position may not include all of the duties listed in a class description nor do the listed examples include all duties that may be found in positions allocated to the class. Allocation of positions to a class is determined on the amount of time spent in performing the primary duties. Benchmarking. The process by which an organization seeks to identify top performing organizations and analyze their strategies, policies and practices for the purpose of learning some or all of them. Broad banding. A pay structure that consolidates a large number of pay grades and salary ranges into much fewer broad bands with relatively wide salary ranges, typically 65% - 100% difference from the minimum pay rate of the range to the maximum pay rate of the range. Class of positions. A group of one or more positions, regardless of location, which are alike enough in duties and responsibilities to be called by the same descriptive title, to be given the same pay scale under similar conditions and to require substantially the same qualifications. See also allocation to class. Classification specification. A summary of the most important features of one or more similar positions, including the general nature, duties and responsibilities, and level of skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions of the work performed. Typically includes the employee characteristics required for competent performance of the job. A classification specification should describe and focus on the job itself, and not on any specific individual who might fill the job. This term is used interchangeably with the term job description. Compa-ratio. The ratio of an actual pay rate (numerator) to the midpoint or some other control point for the respective pay grade (denominator). Compa-ratios are used primarily to measure and monitor an individual s actual rate of pay to the midpoint or some other control point of their range. A compa-ratio can be calculated for a group of people, a department or an entire organization. Compensable factors. Any factor used to provide a basis for comparing job content in a job evaluation scheme. The most commonly employed compensable factors include responsibility, skill required, effort and working conditions. Compression. Pay differentials too small to be considered equitable. The term may apply to differences between (1) the pay of supervisors and subordinates; (2) the pay of experienced and newly hired personnel of the same job; and (3) pay range midpoints in successive job grades or related grades across pay structures. 99

101 Control point. The point within a salary range representing the desired pay for a fully qualified, satisfactory performer in a job or group of jobs at a given time. Frequently, the control point is the midpoint of the pay range. Exempt. A term referring to employees who are exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA). These employees include executives, administrative employees, professional employees and those engaged in outside sales as defined by the FLSA. Insufficient data. PAS required at least 5 job matches before using the data reported by surveyed employers. When there were fewer than 5 job matches, then it was shown as insufficient data. Internal equity. A fairness criterion that directs an employer to establish wage rates that correspond to each job s relative value to the organization. Job analysis. The systematic and formal study of the tasks and responsibilities that comprise job content. The process seeks to obtain important and relevant information about the nature and level of the work performed and the specifications required for an incumbent to perform the job at a competent level. Job evaluation. A formal process used to create a job worth within an organization. The two basic approaches are the market data approach and job content approach. Job family. A group of jobs having the same nature, but, requiring different levels of skills, effort, responsibility or working conditions. KSA s. Knowledge, skills, and abilities are common job specifications; knowledge refers to acquired mental information necessary to do the job; skills refers to acquired manual dexterity or measurable behaviors; and abilities refers to natural talents or acquired capacity or proficiency. Labor Market Maximum. As presented in the report, the maximum is the average or mean of highest level wages reported by surveyed employers. Since it represents an average, the actual maximum wage of individual employers will typically be higher or lower than the average reported. Labor Market Midpoint. As used in the report, the midpoint represents the average or mean of the middle of the pay ranges reported by surveyed employers. Since it represents an average, the actual midpoint wage of individual employers will typically be higher or lower than the average reported. Labor Market Minimum. As presented in the report, the minimum is the average or mean of entry-level wages reported by surveyed employers. Since it represents an average, the actual entry-level wage of individual employers will typically be higher or lower than the average reported. Midpoint. The salary that represents the middle of a given salary range or pay grade. Midpoint progression. The percentage increase in the midpoint from one salary grade to the next, expressed as a percentage of the lower midpoint Open ranges. Pay grades or salary ranges that are without steps comprised of a minimum pay rate and a maximum pay rate. Typically open ranges may have a midpoint or other control point within the range. Pay band. The range of pay rates from minimum to maximum established for a pay grade or class. Typically used to set individual employee pay rates. This term may be used interchangeably with the term pay range or salary range. Point-factor method of job evaluation. A quantitative job evaluation method that uses defined factors and degree levels within each factor (usually five to seven levels which are also defined). Each factor is weighted according to its importance (to the organization.) Job content descriptions are compared to 100

102 definitions of the degree levels and the corresponding points assigned to the appropriate level are then awarded to the job and added for all factors to determine the total job score. The total scores are used to create a job worth hierarchy. Position description (individual job). Job content description of work performed by one person consisting of duties and responsibilities assigned by a competent authority. Quartile. A distribution divided into fourths. The first quartile corresponds to the 25 th percentile, the second to the 50 th percentile, the third to the 75 th percentile, and the fourth to the 100 th percentile. Range overlap. The degree to which adjacent salary ranges or grades in a given salary structure encompass the same pay levels Range spread. The distance from the salary grade minimum to the salary grade maximum, typically expressed as a percentage Salary range or grade. A range of pay rates typically defined by a minimum, midpoint & maximum, which reflect jobs having a similar internal or external value Salary structure. A series of salary ranges which encompass a family of jobs or the entire universe of jobs within a jurisdiction Working out of class. An employee may be considered working out of class when assigned duties and responsibilities by a competent authority that fall outside the employee s classification specification. Such duties and responsibilities are typically of a similar nature but at a higher level. Typically such an assignment is on a temporary basis due to a position vacancy, extended leave of absence of another employee or other staffing shortages. Classification Terms Department: Division: Program: Director: A major organizational unit within the County whose principal executive officer reports directly to the County Executive, elected official, or Chief Judge. A major organizational or administrative work unit of a department whose principal employee report directly to a department director. Divisions typically have additional subdivisions headed by supervisors or administrators performing tasks related to the primary division function. A specialized area which has specific complex components and discrete functions which distinguish it from other programs (or the main body of the County). A program is specific to a particular subject. The specific components and discrete, specialized tasks typically involve interpretation of policies, procedures and regulations; budget coordination/administration; independent functioning; and typically, public contact relating specifically to program subject matter, clients and participants. Employees whose primary responsibility is directing and controlling program operations of an organization, program or department who regularly and customarily exercise broad and discretionary authority and who supervise or direct multiple programs. An employee designated by the County Executive to be the head of a department. The director of a specific and clearly defined functional department of the organization. Employees who customarily and regularly exercise discretion and independent judgment, and whose primary duty (fifty percent of the time or more) consists of: 1) formulates policy and directs the work of a work unit or a department or department subdivision, 2) administers one or more policies or programs of the 101

103 Manager or Superintendent: Administrator: Supervisor: Professional: Lead Worker: Specialist: County or a department subdivision, 3) manages, administers, and controls a function, or subdivision including the physical, financial, and human resources, 4) has substantial responsibility in human resources administration, public information, policy development, and the preparation and administration of budgets, 5) are functionally above the first level of supervision and exercises authority that is not merely routine or clerical in nature and requires the consistent use of independent judgment. An employee appointed by the County Executive or his/her designee to administer or manage all delegated functions of a program or department subdivision. Reporting to a department director, the manager or superintendent, typically has responsibilities similar to that of a director but for a smaller subdivision of a department. Typically responsible for the management of firstline supervisors or a multi-functional subdivision of a department that is large or where functions cross department lines. Managers manage or direct the work of people and services or tasks at a full program or functional level. Employees who customarily and regularly exercise discretion and independent judgment within a specific or limited area of expertise and whose primary duty (fifty percent or more of the time) requires knowledge and expertise that is specific to a program or discipline. Duties typically consist of responsibility for work directly related to the area of expertise and/or related to management policies or general business operations in specialized and/or limited functions. On a professional level, performs in a specialized area with specific components and discrete tasks that distinguish it from the main body of the County or department/division function. Administrators have day-to-day responsibilities for function or program administration within clearly defined parameters. Administrators typically do not supervise others. Any employee assigned responsibility by management to participate in all of the following functions with respect to subordinate employees: 1. selection of staff 2. training and development 3. planning and assignment of work 4. evaluation of performance, and 5. corrective action. Participation in these functions must not be of a merely routine nature but requires the exercise of individual judgment. A supervisor is responsible for the performance of others. A leader of others. Primarily responsible for following direction from above and passing this on to subordinates. A link between higher management and his/her work group. Plans and schedules work for others as well as his/her self. Must make decisions about a number of jobs rather than just one; supervisors are employed to exercise a wider and longer overview of work areas than is the individual worker. Employees performing work which requires consistent exercise of independent judgment and requires advanced knowledge normally gained through achieving at least a baccalaureate degree in a specialized field as opposed to general academic instruction, but which may be gained through experience and home study. An employee assigned responsibility by management to receive and convey directions to fellow employees, take the lead in performing assigned tasks and ensure that tasks are properly completed. This type of position is distinguished from a journey-level employee who is occasionally required to assist with training and direction of less experienced employees while performing the assigned journey tasks. Leadership functions are secondary to the duties performed. Duties involve intensive application of knowledge and skills in a specific 102

104 Technician: Trades: Clerical: segment of an occupational area. Duties require specialized knowledge or skills which are gained through academic and/or vocational courses such as those offered in technical or community colleges, or equivalent on-the-job training. Duties require the use of specialized manual or mechanical skills and dexterity and a comprehensive knowledge of work processes, normally acquired through an apprenticeship, other formal training, or extensive and controlled on-the-job training. Work requires the use of skills required to support office operations. General Classification Terms Complexity of Work: Refers to the scope, variety and difficulty of the duties, responsibilities and skills required to perform the work. Complexity may be categorized as follows: 1. Basic consists of clear-cut tasks that are directly related with little choice involved with respect to rules, procedures, materials or equipment that will be used. 2. Routine involves the performance of several related and repetitive tasks that require some judgment with respect to the rules, procedures, materials or equipment that will be used. 3. Complex requires the use of a wide variety of rules, processes, materials, or equipment that requires an application of specialized knowledge or skills. Decisions must be made independently regarding which rules, processes, materials or equipment to use in order to effectively accomplish work assignments. 4. Highly Complex consists of broad responsibilities including extensive research and analysis of systems, figures or similar information to determine the nature and scope of problems that need to be solved. Work involves originating new policies, procedures and/or techniques to deal with problems. Coordinate: Direct the work of others: Independent: Journey-level: Judgment: Policy: Procedure: Program: Supervision Required: Duties performed involve independently organizing, monitoring, evaluating and making adjustments for a program or activity. Provide work guidance or direction but is not a "lead"; does not have the responsibility of assigning, instructing and/or checking the work of others on a regular and ongoing basis. Has the authority to make decisions without supervisory approval regarding the work processes and methods that will be used; can modify procedures as long as such changes conform to County/departmental policies and procedures. Fully competent in all aspects of a body of work and given broad/general guidance, can complete work assignments to standards under minimal supervision. The latitude in making decisions such as work priorities, workflow, work methods and formulating, revising and interpreting policies and procedures. A general statement of the organization's principles or objectives. A prescribed written course of action or method for completing assignments; the how-to steps to produce a desired result. A specialized area which has specific complex components and discrete tasks that distinguishes it from other programs (or the main body of the organization). A program is specific to a particular subject. The extent of control exercised by the supervisor with respect to the way assignments are made. The latitude that the position incumbent has in 103

105 performing and/or determining work methods and priorities; the scope of decision-making authority that the position incumbent has to use discretion in determining a course of action in new or unusual situations; and the degree of review of completed assignments. There are four basic types of supervision: 1. Direct Supervision. Work is performed in accordance with specific instructions regarding assignments to be completed and sequence of work steps to be employed. Decision-making authority is limited to clearly defined work procedures, formats and priorities. Work is reviewed for accuracy, and adherence to instructions and established procedures. 2. General Supervision. Recurring assignments are carried out within established guidelines without specific instruction. Deviation from normal policies, procedures and work methods requires supervisory approval and supervisory guidance is provided in new or unusual situations. The employee's work is periodically reviewed to verify compliance with policies and procedures. 3. General Direction. Work assignments are carried out in accordance with established policies and objectives. Position incumbents plan and organize the work, determine the work methods to be employed and assist in determining priorities and deadlines. Completed work is reviewed in terms of effectiveness in producing expected results. 4. Administrative Direction. Position incumbents have responsibility for independently planning, designing and carrying out programs, projects and studies in accordance with broad policy statements and/or legal requirements. Work is reviewed in terms of adherence to such considerations as program goals, budget limitations, compliance with applicable laws and regulations and general County policies. 104

106 Appendix G: Internal Equity Point Bands Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band MATERIAL CONTROL SPECIALIST G03/C CUSTODIAN 8015 C ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT G00/G08/G30/K TRANSPORT AGENT 1560 K COURIER 1201 G WWTP UTILITY WORKER 9061 C RECORDS CENTER ASSISTANT 1205 G COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT INSTALLER 1501 C MAIL SERVICES CLERK 1203 G MATERIAL CONTROL SPECIALIST C10/C13/G INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE TECHNICIAN K05/K ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN G WWTP OPERATOR C HOME DETENTION MONITOR 2055 G FAMILY RESOURCE SPECIALIST G LEGAL ASSISTANT G WW MAINTENANCE WORKER 9005 C AIRPORT MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN 8003 C ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN G AUTOPSY TECHNICIAN 1563 K JUVENILE INTAKE SCREENER 2061 G12/G INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE TECHNICIAN K03/K04/K05/K06/K LEGAL PROCESS ASSISTANT G FAMILY RESOURCE SPECIALIST G TELECOMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR 4040 K SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM SPECIALIST 7003 G ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT G10/E01/K PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANT 1401 K COMMUNITY PROGRAM EDUCATOR 1410 G EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN 1503 C CLAIMS AND SAFETY TECHNICIAN 1550 K MATERIAL CONTROL SPECIALIST C BUYER 1823 G WEATHERIZATION TECHNICIAN 3019 G COMMUNITY CENTER SHIFT SUPERVISOR 5005 K PLANNER K WW MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN 9007 C WWTP OPERATOR C ASSISTANT CLERK OF THE COUNCIL 1650 E01/E

107 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band RECORDS SPECIALIST 1207 G PERSONNEL ANALYST K HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGER 1349 K PARALEGAL 1710 C KITCHEN SUPERVISOR 1913 G10/G LOAN OFFICER K INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST K05/K07/K15/K HEALTH RECORDS INFORMATION TECHNICIAN 7087 G INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE TECHNICIAN K ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN K05/K ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT G15/G16/G17/ E02/E04/K04/KO5 EMERGENCY PROGRAM COORDINATOR 1505 K GOVERNMENT RELATIONS COORDINATOR 1620 K LEGAL ASSISTANT G LEGAL PROCESS ASSISTANT G FAMILY RESOURCE SPECIALIST G12/G UTILIZATION REVIEW TECHNICIAN 7085 G RESTITUTION COORDINATOR 2090 G HOUSING REHABILITATION INSPECTOR 3029 K EQUIPMENT OPERATION INSTRUCTOR 8061 K EXECUTIVE AIDE 1275 E BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CLERK 1630 G16/G DIVERSION COUNSELOR K ENERGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST 3020 G INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST K07/K16/K21/K WW MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST 9009 C WWTP LABORATORY TECHNICIAN 9039 C BENEFITS SPECIALIST 1301 K SENIOR BUYER 1825 K DRUG & ALCOHOL COUNSELOR G ADULT PROBATION OFFICER K PERMIT COUNTER SUPERVISOR 6081 K NURSING CLINIC COORDINATOR 7048 G FACILITIES MAINTENANCE COORDINATOR 8017 K04/K WWTP PRETREATMENT TECHNICIAN 9059 C COUNCILMEMBER ASSISTANT 1655 E PLANNER K ICE SKATING PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 5017 K CONTRACT COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST 1813 G10/K CALENDAR COORDINATOR 2015 G JUDICIAL ASSISTANT-DISTRICT COURT 2020 G JUDICIAL ASSISTANT-SUPERIOR COURT 2022 G16/K SENIOR PROPERTY ROOM OFFICER 1580 N WELLNESS COORDINATOR 1303 K AIRPORT ADMINISTRATOR 8007 K

108 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band THERAPEUTIC RECREATIONAL SUPERVISOR 7079 K CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COORDINATOR K06/K RISK INVESTIGATOR K CABLE OPERATIONS SPECIALIST K LEGAL ASSISTANT K INVESTIGATOR AND PROCESS SERVER 1758 K03/K COURT REPORTER 2010 K DIVERSION COUNSELOR K WORK CREW SUPERVISOR 2081 G12/K PLANNER K SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR K03/K04/K05/K GENERAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR 8075 K INTERNAL AUDITOR K LEGAL INTERVIEWER 1721 K LEGAL INTERVIEWER SPECIALIST 1723 K LEGAL PROCESS SUPERVISOR 1735 K CRIME VICTIMS ADVOCATE K03/K COMMUNITY SERVICES RESOURCES DEVELOPER 3007 K ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST K PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNER 5021 K EQUIPMENT SERVICES SUPERVISOR 8063 K WWTP MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR 9041 K OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 4030 K BUDGET ANALYST 1110 K EEO TRAINING/EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST 1344 K TRAINING/EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST 1345 K JUVENILE PROBATION COUNSELOR 2065 K ADULT PROBATION OFFICER K LOAN OFFICER K FAMILY RESOURCES PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 3045 K LANDSCAPE SUPERVISOR 5023 K AIRPORT OPERATIONS MANAGER 8005 K PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR K WW MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR C ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT E04/K04/K ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN K06/K ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST 1250 K EEO/ADA SPECIALIST 1343 K PARKS SUPERVISOR 5027 K INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST K LABOR RELATIONS ANALYST K PERSONNEL ANALYST K ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATOR 1450 K ADULT PROBATION OFFICER K DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COORDINATOR 2095 K COMMUNITY CENTER MANAGER 5003 K

109 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band LEGAL ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR 1707 K FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR 8018 K WWTP OPERATOR C ACCOUNTANT K06/K EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 1230 K CASE MANAGER SUPERVISOR 7027 K ADOPTION COUNSELOR 2075 K VOLUNTEER SERVICES COORDINATOR 2093 K GOLF SUPERVISOR 5025 K SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR K07/K MENTAL HEALTH CARE COORDINATOR K07/K CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COORDINATOR K07/K DRUG & ALCOHOL COUNSELOR K CLINICAL DIETICIAN 1915 K ASSISTANT TO ASSESSOR-TREASURER 1247 E CABLE OPERATIONS SPECIALIST K FOOD SERVICE MANAGER 1920 K NUTRITIONAL SERVICE MANAGER 1921 K ICE SKATING PROGRAM COORDINATOR 5019 K RESEARCH ANALYST 1660 E01/E COUNTY ATTORNEY R CASH MANAGEMENT OFFICER 1120 K ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL 1570 K CRIME VICTIMS ADVOCATE K INTERPRETER/COORDINATOR 2025 K COMMUNITY ACTION COORDINATOR K WW ASSISTANT COLLECTION SYSTEM MANAGER 9020 K ARTS MANAGER 1271 E WWTP LAB ANALYST 9035 K DEPUTY AUDITOR 1143 E CLERK OF THE COUNCIL 1653 E PLANNER K ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST K E911 PROGRAM MANAGER 1510 K RISK INVESTIGATOR 1555 K SAFETY OFFICER 1557 K MITIGATION SPECIALIST/INVESTIGATIVE ADMINISTRATOR 1740 K LAND DEVELOPMENT CENTER SUPERVISOR 6083 K COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 1413 K SOLID WASTE RECYCLING ANALYST 8090 K WW MAINT SUPERVISOR K WWTP CHIEF OPERATOR 9057 K CHIEF DEPUTY, CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 2027 E ACCOUNTANT K07/K CHIEF MEDICAL INVESTIGATOR 1565 K HEALTH RECORDS INFORMATION SUPERVISOR 7088 K

110 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band ASSISTANT TO THE AUDITOR 1141 K LEGAL INTERVIEWER SUPERVISOR 1725 K DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR 6070 K NURSING SERVICES EDUCATOR 7049 K SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR K RECREATION SUPERVISOR 5015 K NURSING SHIFT SUPERVISOR 7055 K COUNTY ATTORNEY R LABOR RELATIONS ANALYST K CONTRACT COMPLIANCE OFFICER 1815 K COMMUNITY ACTION COORDINATOR K TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR 4042 K MENTAL HEALTH CARE COORDINATOR K PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR K ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGER FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY 1785 E ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGIC PLANNING MANAGER 4058 E ASSISTANT TO THE EXECUTIVE 1283 E PERFORMANCE AUDITOR 1670 E CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR 1760 K INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE SPECIALIST K13/K18/K QUALITY IMPROVEMENT COORDINATOR 7073 K TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 8035 K EQUIPMENT SERVICES MANAGER 8065 K ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGER 8070 K FORENSIC INVESTIGATION MANAGER 1567 N NURSE PRACTITIONER 7044 K PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 7041 K EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MANAGER 1530 K FACILITIES MAINTENANCE MANAGER 8019 K NURSE SUPERVISOR 7050 N CONTRACT SERVICES MANAGER 1820 E ACCOUNTANT K CHIEF EXAMINER 1330 K CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR 6030 K PLANS EXAMINER SUPERVISOR 6040 K ASSOCIATE TRAFFIC ENGINEER 8028 K WATER PROGRAMS MAINTENANCE MANAGER 9071 K RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT 5030 E PARKS SUPERINTENDENT 5029 K SENIOR RESEARCH ANALYST 1662 E06/E07/E PC & NETWORK SERVICES MANAGER 4050 E FISCAL SERVICES MANAGER 1112 K ASSISTANT TO DIRECTOR OF BUDGET & FINANCE 1150 K INTERNAL AUDITOR K TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 1347 K ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST K

111 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band WWTP SUPERINTENDENT 9082 E LAND DEVELOPMENT CENTER MANAGER 6085 K SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM MANAGER 7017 K NURSE MANAGER 7057 K BUILDING INSPECTION SUPERVISOR 8010 K ASSISTANT RISK MANAGER 1558 E COUNTY ATTORNEY R ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 3012 E PURCHASING AGENT 1835 E PRODUCTION SERVICES MANAGER 4055 E NURSE PRACTITIONER SUPERVISOR 7046 K ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM MANAGER 1260 K07/K ASSISTANT JUVENILE DETENTION MANAGER 2099 K WW COLLECTION SYSTEM MANAGER 9021 K WATER QUALITY SPECIALIST 9078 K SOLID WASTE ADMINISTRATOR 9083 E FIRE MARSHAL 1575 E SPECIAL PROJECTS COORDINATOR 1280 E DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF DISTRICT COURT PROBATION 2042 E JUVENILE PROBATION SUPERVISOR 2069 K DRUG & ALCOHOL SUPERVISOR 2079 K CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER 8023 K PHARMACIST 7083 K TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 8040 K WWTP LAB SUPERVISOR 9037 K BUDGET & FISCAL MANAGER 1115 K CHIEF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR 1763 K WWTP ENGINEER 9033 K ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL 1370 E REVENUE & INVESTMENT MANAGER 1127 E SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 4060 E CABLE MANAGER 1485 K MAINTENANCE MANAGER 9088 E SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR K09/K BUDGET MANAGER 1116 E GIS MANAGER 4065 E PHARMACY COORDINATOR 7084 K ACCOUNTING MANAGER 1108 E CAPTAIN 1583 N SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 9080 EO7 530 CORRECTIONAL CAPTAIN 1584 N CLERK OF SUPERIOR COURT 2028 E WW UTILITY MANAGER 9087 E WATER PROGRAMS MANAGER 9084 E ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER 1265 E

112 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band COUNTY ATTORNEY R CIVIL ENGINEER K TRAFFIC ENGINEER 8030 K DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 1640 E ASSOCIATE MEDICAL EXAMINER 1568 E STAFF PHYSICIAN 7091 E STAFF PSYCHIATRIST 7092 E PHYSICIAN/MEDICAL DIRECTOR 7089 E DEPUTY SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2035 E SOCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR K09/K ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF HUMAN SERVICES 7035 K ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & LAND SERVICES 6090 E DIRECTOR OF DISTRICT COURT PROBATION 2043 E LABOR RELATIONS MANAGER 1316 E PERFORMANCE AUDIT COORDINATOR 1672 E HEALTH SERVICES MANAGER 7090 K COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE FOR COMMITTEES & RESEARCH 1665 E COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE FOR LEGAL & OPERATIONS 1667 E DISTRICT COURT DIVISION MANAGER 2039 E04/E06/K BUILDING OFFICIAL 9081 E COUNTY ENGINEER 9085 E NURSE ADMINISTRATOR 7059 K DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS 1470 E DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 1540 E JUSTICE SERVICES MANAGER 2045 K JUVENILE DETENTION MANAGER 2097 K MAJOR 1585 E MENTAL HEALTH MANAGER 7093 E SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE EXECUTIVE 1285 E CHIEF OF CLINICAL SERVICES 7060 E RISK MANAGER 1559 E CHIEF DEPUTY, ASSESSOR-TREASURER 1248 E DEPUTY DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 9090 E DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES 3050 E DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION 5040 E DIRECTOR OF FACILITY MANAGEMENT 8020 E CHIEF DEPUTY ATTORNEY 1779 R JUVENILE PROBATION MANAGER 2071 K BUREAU CHIEF 1590 E DIRECTOR OF ASSIGNED COUNSEL 1790 R MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF PSBH 7094 E DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION SERVICES 4080 E DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL 1375 E MEDICAL EXAMINER 1569 E

113 Current Pay Total Pts 35/40/45 Pt Band Points/ Proposed Class Title Code Grid/Range 100 Bands No. Band DIRECTOR OF HUMAN SERVICES 7095 E DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES 9092 E DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & LAND SERVICES 6095 E SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2037 E DIRECTOR OF BUDGET & FINANCE 1160 E JUVENILE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2033 E DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR 2040 E SHERIFF 1595 E CHIEF OF STAFF 1290 E COUNTY EXECUTIVE 1292 W

114 Appendix H: Phase 1 Labor Market Survey Summary, August 2002 Local Market Regional Market # of Average Pierce % Pierce # of Average Pierce % Pierce Agency Maximum Maximum Higher or Agency Maximum Maximum Higher or Classification Title Matches Salary Salary Lower Matches Salary Salary Lower Accounting Manager 9 $6,733 6, % 9 6,509 6, % Assessor 4 7,340 7, % Auditor 3 6,605 7, % Budget Manager 7 7,142 6, % 6 7,067 6, % Building Official 8 7,568 6, % Bureau Chief 7 9,001 8, % 5 8,823 8, % Captain (Sheriff) 9 7,618 7, % Chief Deputy Attorney (Civil) 9 8,321 8, % 7 8,029 8, % Chief Deputy Attorney (Criminal) 7 8,922 8, % 6 8,012 8, % Clerk 3 6,593 8, % 2 Insufficient Data Clerk to the Council 6 6,320 8, % 4 4,307 8, % Council Admin 2 6 3,980 4, % Council Research & Policy Admin 2 Insufficient Data 0 No Match Found Council Legal 2 2 Insufficient Data Council Member 5 7,269 5, % Council Member Assistant 4 5,707 5, % Council Research 3 4 6,575 6, % County Attorney 1 5 5,209 4, % 4 4,890 4, % County Attorney 4 5 7,269 7, % 6 7,644 7, % County Engineer 10 8,361 8, % 8 8,435 8, % 113

115 Local Market Regional Market # of Average Pierce % Pierce # of Average Pierce % Pierce Agency Maximum Maximum Higher or Agency Maximum Maximum Higher or Classification Title Matches Salary Salary Lower Matches Salary Salary Lower County Executive 6 10,655 9, % Director of Assigned Council 3 8,146 9, % 3 8,772 9, % Director of Budget & Finance 10 9,524 10, % 5 8,146 10, % Director of Community Services 4 9,458 7, % 6 7,134 7, % Director of Facilities 7 8,321 7, % 8 6,394 7, % Director of Government Relations 6 8,430 9, % 3 7,545 9, % Director of Human Services 8 8,394 7, % 4 7,913 7, % Director of Information Services 11 9,157 9, % 6 8,409 9, % Director of Parks & Recreation 10 8,626 7, % 6 7,612 7, % Director of Planning & Land Services 10 8,711 8, % 7 7,956 8, % Director of Public Works & Utilities 9 9,676 9, % 6 8,424 9, % Economic Development Manager 5 7,637 5, % 3 7,294 5, % Forensic Pathologist 1 Insufficient Data 0 No Match Found GIS Manager 6 6,757 8, % 7 6,826 8, % Labor Relations Manager 8 7,313 6, % 6 6,425 6, % Maintenance Manager (Roads) 11 7,114 7, % Medical Examiner 1 Insufficient Data 1 Insufficient Data Mental Health Manager 3 7,239 6, % 3 7,509 6, % Nurse Supervisor - Corrections 3 6,127 6, % Physician/Medical Director 2 12,268 12, % 2 Insufficient Data Prosecuting Attorney 9 9,789 9, % Purchasing Agent 4 6,529 6, % 8 5,515 6, % Recreation Superintendent 6 6,968 6, % Revenue & Investment Manager 6 6,425 6, % 8 6,840 6, % Risk Manager 8 6,873 8, % 6 6,404 8, % 114

116 Local Market Regional Market # of Average Pierce % Pierce # of Average Pierce % Pierce Agency Maximum Maximum Higher or Agency Maximum Maximum Higher or Classification Title Matches Salary Salary Lower Matches Salary Salary Lower Senior Property Room Officer 5 4,977 4, % Sheriff 10 9,543 9, % 7 8,823 9, % Software Development Manager 6 6,860 8, % 6 6,976 8, % Staff Physician 2 Insufficient Data 2 Insufficient Data Water Programs Manager 5 7,645 7, % 2 Insufficient Data WW Utility Manager 5 7,493 7, % 4 6,409 7, % WWTP Superintendent 6 6,286 6, % Average 1.0% Average 10.1% 115

117 Appendix I: Phase 2 Labor Market Survey Summary, September 2003 PIERCE COUNTY LOCAL MARKET REGIONAL MARKET Classification Title Incumbents Range High Average Actual Salary Agency Matches Incumbents Average Range High Average Actual Salary Pierce County Range High % Higher or Lower Agency Matches Incumbents Average Range High Average Actual Salary Pierce County Range High % Higher or Lower ACCOUNTANT III 2 73,671 73, ,961 61,084 15% ,071 59,497 15% ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT II 12 40,863 35, ,176 38,545-1% ,568 33,897 12% ADULT PROBATION OFFICER I 4 44,335 35, ,153 50,964-17% ,724 51,684-13% ADULT PROBATION OFFICER II 9 50,304 45, ,038 50,964-9% ,724 51,684-1% AIRPORT OPERATIONS MANAGER 1 50,668 50, Insufficient Data ,292 67,300-38% ASSISTANT FIRE MARSHAL 2 69,359 63, ,924 50,321 9% ,148 68,551 0% AUTOPSY TECHNICIAN 2 50,668 50, ,527 50,329-4% ,671 38,194 19% BUDGET ANALYST 2 57,349 57, ,893 53,909 1% ,196 57,734-3% BUYER 1 43,056 43, ,099 45,540-10% ,185 47,910-16% CASE MANAGER SUPERVISOR 4 57,349 57, ,631 54,061 0% ,154 No data -12% CHIEF MEDICAL INVESTIGATOR 1 65,228 65, ,724 54,103 7% ,539 99,337-39% CIVIL ENGINEER II 31 68,348 66, ,974 60,531 7% ,414 63,388 0% CIVIL ENGINEER IV 2 88,795 88, ,923 72,734 14% ,761 75,273 9% CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR 1 73,861 70, ,130 58,405 21% ,535 63,776 13% COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN I 3 51,417 51, ,184 51,976-7% ,216 49,894-5% COMMUNITY CENTER MANAGER 1 65,228 65, ,835 70,289-16% ,909 No data 19% CONFIDENTIAL SECRETARY 5 45,352 45, ,043 44,643-8% ,969 40,296 6% CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MGR 1 73,881 73, ,447 73,101-7% ,161 71,533-4% CONTRACT COMPL SPECIALIST II 25 53,526 53, ,513 46,882 2% ,796 42,782 5% COOK III 1 43,950 43, ,751 36,463 11% ,597 40,472 3% COURT REPORTER 19 57,075 57, ,209 54,649 3% ,002 No data 27% CRIMINAL INVESTIGATOR 4 68,759 65, Insufficient Data ,920 56,418 15% CUSTODIAL SUPERVISOR 1 50,668 44, No match 0 0 No match DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR 1 99,426 99, ,251 73,738 24% ,049 98,073-3% DRUG/ALCOHOL COUNSELOR II 2 47,507 45, Insufficient data ,383 52,388-21% 116

118 Incumbents PIERCE COUNTY LOCAL MARKET REGIONAL MARKET Agency Matches Incumbents Pierce County Range High % Higher or Lower Average Average Average Average Actual Range Actual Range Average Classification Title Range High Salary High Salary High Actual Salary E-911 PROGRAM MANAGER 1 69,389 69, ,790 61,790 12% 2 1 Insufficient data EMER MGT PROG MANAGER 2 69,398 65, ,510 69,669-12% ,242 71,754-5% EQUIPMENT SVC SUPERVISOR 1 65,228 63, ,036 62,058-1% ,799 53,353 13% FACILITIES MAINTEN SUPERVISOR 5 61,172 57, ,831 63,102-10% ,389 57,232-2% FAMILY EDUCATOR 18 37,440 34, ,230 42,377-17% 2 1 Insufficient data GIS SPECIALIST 3 59,261 59, ,924 53,775-3% ,613 53,300-1% GOLF SUPERVISOR 0 65, Insufficient data ,977 No data 7% HELP DESK SPECIALIST II 2 61,173 60, ,471 46,455 19% ,878 45,109 16% HUMAN SERVICES PROG MGR 1 73,881 73, ,345 69,994 2% 2 4 Insufficient data INFO TECHNOL SPECIALIST III 33 83,238 80, ,778 60,170 28% ,986 66,556 16% INTERPRETER/COORDINATOR 1 60,715 60, Insufficient data 1 1 Insufficient data JUDICIAL ASSISTANT 21 57,075 50, ,954 35,679 47% ,169 41,619 32% JUVENILE COURT ADMINISTRATOR 1 99,426 No data ,206 95,369 1% , ,903-7% JUVENILE DETEN ADMINISTRATOR 1 69,388 69, ,326 70,966-10% ,604 74,750-11% JUV INTAKE SCREENER (new class) ,060 45, Insufficient data JUVENILE PROBATION COUNSELOR II ,491 54, ,308 58,732-3% ,805 50,250 11% LEGAL ASSISTANT II 38 35,449 35, ,140 38,494-12% ,531 36,648-10% MEDICAL SERVICES COORDINATOR 1 49,878 49, Insufficient data ,246 No data -21% MENTAL HEALTH THERAPIST 5 61,172 51, ,979 50,928 9% ,118 39,518 25% NURSE PRACTITIONER (ARNP) 0 78, ,719 61,978 16% ,627 56,598 25% NURSE SUPERVISOR 1 75,857 68, ,393 63,838 14% ,716 58,388 17% OFFICE ASSISTANT II 90 38,503 36, ,580 33,215 5% 9 2,064 31,402 28,298 23% OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 1 83,616 83, ,425 68,489 12% ,554 51,228 43% PARKS SUPERVISOR 1 65,228 65, ,806 56,528 7% ,377 54,533 10% PARTS SPECIALIST II 1 40,913 40, No match 0 0 No match PERSONNEL ANALYST 4 57,349 55, ,553 53,885 0% ,204 53,857-1% PHARMACIST 1 81,348 81, Insufficient data ,206 No data -3% PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 3 77,043 72, Insufficient data ,447 No data 23% PLANS EXAMINER SUPERVISOR 1 69,388 69, ,666 65,901 1% ,700 64,020-3% PLANNER II 21 60,438 59, ,974 54,368 4% ,146 53,444 4% PROGRAM SPECIALIST III 8 62,179 61, ,687 52,084 8% ,137 No data -7% Agency Matches Incumbents Pierce County Range High % Higher or Lower 117

119 Incumbents PIERCE COUNTY LOCAL MARKET REGIONAL MARKET Agency Matches Incumbents Pierce County Range High % Higher or Lower Average Average Average Average Actual Range Actual Range Average Classification Title Range High Salary High Salary High Actual Salary PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANT 1 47,507 39, ,471 51,242-16% ,482 45,658-9% PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR I 6 61,172 55, ,348 59,088-2% ,841 59,366 2% Agency Matches Incumbents Pierce County Range High % Higher or Lower REAL-TIME COURT REPORTER (not a current class) Insufficient Data 1 0 Insufficient data RECREATION SUPERVISOR 4 57,491 53, ,172 52,434 2% ,572 54,364 2% RECREATION THERAPIST 0 45,801 No data 1 1 Insufficient data ,944 No data 12% REG HEALTH INFO TECHNICIAN 1 40,996 36, Insufficient data ,976 No data 24% SAFETY OFFICER 1 65,052 65, ,927 58,110 7% ,605 54,329 7% SOLID WASTE RECYCLING ANALYST 3 57,491 54, ,836 58,246-2% ,594 58,488-14% SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS 1 78,582 78, ,917 78,588-10% ,019 75,909-17% SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR 1 99,426 99, Insufficient data 0 0 No match TRAFFIC ENGINEER 1 88,795 88, ,452 83,619 3% ,784 77,873 6% TRAINING & DEVELOPMT SPECIALIST 1 57,349 57, Missing data 6 91 Missing data VICTIM-WITNESS PROG SPECIALIST 9 41,568 37, ,275 43,775-10% ,978 41,233-10% WW MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST 11 59,966 57, ,288 47,288 22% ,582 50,706 14% WW MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN 23 47,923 46, ,227 43,811 4% 3 26 Missing data WW TREATMT PLANT CHIEF OPER 1 69,389 69, ,854 57,845 12% ,576 64,002-6% WW TREATMT PLANT LAB ANALYST 1 61,172 61, ,799 48,950 16% ,758 50,385 12% WW TREATMT PLANT OPERATOR II 4 48,984 46, ,571 46,316 3% ,473 46,941-1% AVERAGE

120 Appendix J: Base Pay Plan, Option 2 Pay Plan Option 2 BASE PAY RANGE VARIABLE PAY RANGE Band Point Range Min Diff Base Minimum Step 2 Step 3 (Midpoint) Step 4 Base Maximum Range Width Variable Maximum Variable Width $ 25,302 $ 27,199 $ 29,097 $ 30,994 $ 32,892 30% $ 37,952 15% % $ 27,199 $ 29,239 $ 31,279 $ 33,319 $ 35,359 30% $ 40,799 15% % $ 31,279 $ 33,625 $ 35,971 $ 38,317 $ 40,663 30% $ 46,919 15% % $ 35,971 $ 38,669 $ 41,367 $ 44,064 $ 46,762 30% $ 53,956 15% % $ 37,770 $ 41,074 $ 44,379 $ 47,684 $ 50,989 35% $ 56,654 11% % $ 43,435 $ 47,236 $ 51,036 $ 54,837 $ 58,637 35% $ 65,152 11% % $ 46,693 $ 50,778 $ 54,864 $ 58,949 $ 63,035 35% $ 70,039 11% % $ 50,195 $ 54,587 $ 58,979 $ 63,371 $ 67,763 35% $ 75,292 11% % $ 58,979 $ 64,139 $ 69,300 $ 74,460 $ 79,621 35% $ 88,468 11% % $ 66,351 $ 72,157 $ 77,962 $ 83,768 $ 89,574 35% $ 99,526 11% % $ 69,668 $ 75,764 $ 81,860 $ 87,956 $ 94,052 35% $ 104,503 11% % $ 73,152 $ 79,553 $ 85,953 $ 92,354 $ 98,755 35% $ 109,728 11% % $ 80,467 $ 87,508 $ 94,549 $ 101,590 $ 108,631 35% $ 120,701 11% % $ 86,502 $ 94,071 $101,640 $ 109,209 $ 116,778 35% $ 129,753 11% % $ 90,827 $ 98,775 $106,722 $ 114,669 $ 122,617 35% $ 136,241 11% % $ 95,369 $ 103,713 $112,058 $ 120,403 $ 128,748 35% $ 143,053 11% 119

121 Appendix K: Base Pay Plan, Option 3 Pay Plan Option 3 Band Point Range Min Diff Base Minimum BASE PAY RANGE VARIABLE PAY RANGE Base Midpoint Base Maximum Range Width Variable Maximum Variable Width $ 25,302 $ 29,097 $ 32,892 30% $ 37,952 15% % $ 27,199 $ 31,279 $ 35,359 30% $ 40,799 15% % $ 31,279 $ 35,971 $ 40,663 30% $ 46,919 15% % $ 35,971 $ 41,367 $ 46,762 30% $ 53,956 15% % $ 37,770 $ 44,379 $ 50,989 35% $ 56,654 11% % $ 43,435 $ 51,036 $ 58,637 35% $ 65,152 11% % $ 46,693 $ 54,864 $ 63,035 35% $ 70,039 11% % $ 50,195 $ 58,979 $ 67,763 35% $ 75,292 11% % $ 58,979 $ 69,300 $ 79,621 35% $ 88,468 11% % $ 66,351 $ 77,962 $ 89,574 35% $ 99,526 11% % $ 69,668 $ 83,602 $ 97,536 40% $ 104,503 7% % $ 73,152 $ 81,930 $ 102,413 40% $ 109,728 7% % $ 80,467 $ 96,560 $ 112,654 40% $ 120,701 7% % $ 86,502 $ 103,803 $ 121,103 40% $ 129,753 7% % $ 90,827 $ 108,993 $ 127,158 40% $ 136,241 7% % $ 95,369 $ 114,442 $ 133,516 40% $ 143,053 7% 120