Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Asphalt Crew topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sabine Parish jury abolishes paver foreman role, creates two lead-operator positions and approves $50 phone stipend
Summary
The Sabine Parish Police Jury voted to eliminate a foreman/paver operator position established in 2022, create two lead-operator positions with a new base pay structure, and approve a $50-per-month stipend for lead operators’ personal phones.
The Sabine Parish Police Jury voted to abolish the foreman/paver operator position created by Resolution 9,069 (adopted July 15, 2022) and to create two lead-operator positions for the asphalt lay-down crew, and separately approved a $50 monthly cellular stipend for those lead operators.
The change replaces the single foreman/paver operator role (previously set at $28 per hour) with two lead-operator positions. During discussion, staff and jurors disagreed over the net fiscal impact when step increases and benefit costs are included; multiple speakers described the change as a “wash” at the base hourly rate while acknowledging step-pay and benefit differences could alter total costs. Jurors noted the proposed base-rate for the lead operator position was $23 per hour; speakers also referenced calculations that, including steps, could raise effective pay for promoted employees to about $25–$26 per hour (figures presented as estimates during debate).
Road department staff told the jury the foreman position had become vacant and said two existing crew members have already been performing many of the foreman tasks. Jurors said the change would allow the two lead operators to be deployed across projects rather than rely on a single lead, and several jurors said they have observed the two employees working in the lead roles in recent months.
Following that vote, the jury approved a $50-per-month allowance for the two lead operators to use toward business calls on personal cell phones. Supporters said a stipend was cheaper and more practical than issuing department phones; opponents argued it was unnecessary for workers who already had phones. The jury approved the stipend after discussion.
The jury made clear in debate that the relevant budgetary comparisons should focus on base hourly rates, not variable insurance or household-dependent benefits; several jurors asked staff to re-run spreadsheets to clarify total-year cost comparisons including step plans.
Votes at the meeting on these items were taken by voice; the motions carried.
