A bill for an ordinance maintaining the current classification and pay plan for employees in the Career Service and for certain employees not in the Career Service without pay adjustments. Does not amend the Classification and Pay Plan by making pay range adjustments and pay grade changes based upon the annual market study of prevailing wages in the Denver metropolitan area. The Committee approved filing this item on 5-5-20.
Provides one abstention. Council Resolution 414 has been adopted. Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens and Councilmember Black, go ahead with your comment on 370. Thank you, Mr. President. I am clarifying that the Office of Human Resources has asked us. To vote yes. On this. Ordinance. Which affirms that there. Will be no changes to the classification and play paint plans due to the annual pay survey. Because of the city's current financial position. The fiscally responsible. Thing to do is to maintain the 2020. Pay levels. Thank you, Councilmember Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Mr. President. I just had some questions regarding this. I understand that it's the it's our recommendation to vote yes, because the I can't remember the name of the the board that approves these. The survey asked us to vote yes because they told us to vote no. But I just want to make a comment that working in this city and doing pay surveys are really important. And a lot of these people who are impacted by this, of us voting yes, which will ultimately lead to them not getting a pay increase for those city employees who've been retiring, planning on retiring this year and looking forward to this, this will impact their retirement. And I have asked, oh, each hour and some of it will be annual increase ranged from $2 to $0.69 to 2000. So if you're getting a 2000 pay increase and you are retiring, I'm sorry, that does impact your retirement. So I will follow suit here. But I just want to acknowledge that this is a hard pill for me to swallow for those people who have given their career to the city and county of Denver and who have been waiting for this pay audit sometimes for two years. I know one particular person who has been waiting for this audit for two years. And so I just want to acknowledge that and I understand why we're being asked to because of the time of COVID and because of our tax and our budget shortfall. But at the same time, I just it's really hard for me to understand retiring and not having possibly that $2,000 when you retire. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Kinnick. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a similar comment to Councilwoman Sandoval. First, I feel like the description of this bill is a little weird. It mentions the annual market study of prevailing wages in the Denver metropolitan area. In fact, we do a broader study that includes multiple metropolitan areas. So I'm a little confused by the description, but just so I can just my comments make sense, I just want to explain what this does. It does two things. It says for certain classifications that have lagged behind for two years, which means the midpoint in their range is much lower than the midpoint for their peers. Then, you know, two things happen. One is we move the range so that we match that midpoint that does not have a fiscal impact. You just move it when new people are hired, you know, if they're kind of, you know, in the middle of their career versus if they're a hotshot or, you know, it adjusts where you might get hired at going forward. It might suggest how many steps there are in the scale for people when they get married increases. But it doesn't have an immediate fiscal impact. It just right sizes the scale. And then the second thing it does is for people who've been behind individually, because they're behind that that scale, then they might get a bump to bring them back up to where their peers are. And so I think that I like Councilwoman Sandoval. I believe that we should treat all our employees the same, which means. Is that your salary field, your salary scale should be set where the market is. And so because of the timing of this survey, we have a whole crop of workers who scale will not be adjusted. And that to me does not feel necessary. I would have preferred these two things to be split apart. I would have supported continuing to do the scale adjustment so that as folks are moving forward in the future, this scale is right sized. Will salaries change because of the crisis? Perhaps, but no one knows how much and no one knows when. And no one. In the past, we have not penalized workers two years later for changes. You know that we don't slide people down, right? As the market changes, they may grow less quickly going forward, but we don't take people's pay away except when we do it collectively. Like the furloughs are collective action to say we're going to share this pain across the city rather than making a few workers not not get what they deserve. So so I struggle a little bit with the logic of not adjusting the schedule. However, I do understand about the fiscal impact of the bumps. And I do think that, you know, again, this is a greater good moment. So, you know, I have some heartburn about this approach as well. I did appreciate the department having some dialog with me about it. I will be supporting it tonight, but I just want to go on record and say that I do not believe our charter tells us to stop adjusting the scale for the market when there's a crisis. We may not have the money to pay people, but the scale should still reflect what the peers are being paid. So I would have preferred to go that route. But I understand the difficult moment we're in, and I understand the best intentions that the folks had who brought forward this recommendation not to make any changes. So I'll be going along with it for tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Councilmember Torres. Only to add that what I would I hope even even in a budget circumstance is that we're still asking this question of a pay leveling inappropriateness next year. If this is an annual survey and you do it at the end of the year, will it be done this year? Will it be done next year? And what will that tell us? Because at some point we will come out of this budget crisis and will want to rectify those pay scales to make sure that those employees are paid appropriately. So thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. All right. So no other questions or comments on this one that wasn't called out for a vote. So that concludes the items to be called out this evening. All our bills for introduction are ordered published. Council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote I. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call an item out for a separate vote. Councilmember Cashman, will you please put the proclamations and resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Council President. I move that proclamations and resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in the block for the following items. All series of 2020 unless otherwise identified. 477 for 11 for 12 for 13 for 15 for 71 for 76 332 362 389 392 395 178 319 323, 21 322 406 369. And I believe that does it, sir. Thank you, Councilmember. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary. Roll Call. Black High. CdeBaca I. Flynn High. Fillmore. Herndon High. High High. Cashman High. Kenny Ortega Like Sandoval I. Sawyer I. Torres, I. Council President. I. Madam Secretary, please go to the voting. Announce the results. 1339 The proclamations and resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed. One final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 130 changing the zoning classification for 2160 South Grant Street.