|
|
|
CITY
OF NORWALK PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MINUTES |
Revised 7/17/06
MAY 24, 2006
ATTENDANCE: Herbert Grant, Chair; Joanne Romano; Matthew Miklave;
Gwen Briggs (8:05 p.m.)
STAFF: John Schlosser
CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL
Mr. Grant called the meeting to order at 8:03 p.m., noting that a quorum was not present.
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE LIST SALARY INCREASE/ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESS
Mr. Grant informed those present that the Mayor was supposed to submit the list with his recommendations for increases during the month of April, but he received the recommendations today. Mr. Grant said that he received the performance evaluations and they should be in everyone’s packets.
Mr. Grant said that his major concern is that having gone through the reviews, he found it difficult to understand how a large number of employees exceeded expectations. He added that there were no goals or objectives included in those performance evaluations. Mr. Grant asked the Committee members to review those performance evaluations and tell him how they feel about that.
Ms. Briggs arrived at 8:05 p.m.
At this point there was a quorum present.
Mr. Grant said that goals are set prior to each review period and should be listed in each performance evaluation to determine how that person how performed during the year. He asked how anyone could exceed expectations, when there were no goals.
Mr. Grant noted that all of the evaluations have been completed, except for the Personnel Director, because she will be leaving, the Town Clerk, whose position is elected, the Grants Coordinator, and the Assistant to the Mayor, because that person has been in their position for less than one year.
Mr. Grant said that he will follow up with Mr. Schlosser and urged him to meet with the evaluators and ask how they identified that this person exceeded expectations.
MINUTES FROM APRIL 26, 2006 MEETING
** MS. ROMANO MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
ACTION ON ITEM – SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Grant said that past practice has been to give 3% increases across the board.
Mr. Miklave said that it is more complicated than that. He said that it was safe to say that there has been substantial discussion among the members of the Personnel Committee and the Common Council about the role and weight of performance evaluations in the setting of the salary increases that had been recommended by Mayor Knopp. The views expressed by the Common Council, was that cost of living increase was that and not a merit increase.
Mr. Grant said that the performance evaluation system was reevaluated with a view to be used as a management tool that would closely align the goals of the employee to the goals of the administration.
The goal of the Committee was to separate wage increases from the performance of individual Ordinance List members. That was the unanimously view of the Committee. Over the years there was very serious thought that the performance appraisal should be tied in with the wage increase.
Since the Common Council approved the new structure of the Ordinance List, it has been easier to come up with a merit increase approach. He suggested that if the overall increase is 3%, that the 3% should be against the overall department budget. He said that this would allow flexibility. The bottom line is that wage increases could not exceed 3% of the operating budget.
Mr. Miklave said that he understood the concept but questioned the wisdom of that concept. He pointed out that they were dealing with senior executives of city government and dealing with rather modest numbers. Mr. Miklave said that a 3% increase for an employee making $100,000, is a $3,000 increase spread over 52 weeks. He asked if it would be an incentive to give a 1% increase and spread that over 52 weeks. Mr. Miklave said that he has never seen senior employees treated that way.
Mr. Miklave said that the City does not have a Pay for Performance system. If they did they would be giving bonuses of $20 – 25,000. He said that they deserve as much supports as possible.
Mr. Miklave said that they spend a lot of time discussing senior level salaries each year. He said that he does not think this will have a meaningful impact on their performance.
Mr. Miklave said that senior staff sees other staff under the bargaining unit
getting raises each year, while they have to fight for what they get.
Mr. Grant said that this Committee has to come up with a recommendation of what they are proposing.
Ms. Briggs said that the public strongly recommended giving merit increases rather than cost of living increases. Mr. Grant said that 3% is not a lot to work with. Ms. Romano said that she felt that increases should be based on performance.
Ms. Briggs stressed that she was concerned about the subjectivity of the evaluator.
Mr. Grant asked the Committee what they wanted to propose.
Mr. Miklave said that the best they can do is to ensure the integrity of the performance evaluation system. He said that it was difficult for the Council to substantiate their judgment of the senior staff. He said that it would not be inappropriate to put the Mayor’s recommendations forward.
Mr. Miklave said that he was prepared to move forward with the Mayor’s recommendations.
Mr. Grant said that the Mayor delegates the evaluations down. He reviews the department heads and they in turn review their staff. Mr. Miklave and Ms. Romano agreed that, that is how it is done.
Mr. Grant said that the Mayor did not recommend increases for Peter Nolin, Robert Maslan or himself.
** MR. MIKLAVE MOVED TO SEND THE MAYOR’S 3% WAGE INCREASE RECOMMENDATION TO
THE COMMON COUNCIL
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
The public hearing was scheduled for Jun 28, 2006, prior to the start of the regular meeting.
OLD BUSINESS/AFFAIRS
There was no old business.
NEW BUSINESS/AFFAIRS
Mr. Grant said that the Registrar of Voters are not mandated to receive an increase during their time of service. Mr. Nolin said that in his opinion, the Committee is free to decide what they want to do.
Mr. Grant said that during a survey of other towns, it was noted that Norwalk’s salaries are below other towns and he would like to be on par with other towns of similar size. Mr. Grant said that they are entitled to an increase this fall.
Mr. Grant said that the question now is if the Committee wishes to do anything above and beyond that and what steps they want to take for 2007-2008.
Ms. Briggs asked for a copy of the salary survey, so that they could make a comparison.
NEXT MEETING – WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28, 2006
ADJOURNMENT
** MR. MIKLAVE MOVED TO ADJOURN
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
There was no further business and the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Rosemarie Lombardi
Telesco Secretarial Services
 |
 |