Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Employment Pay Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Titusville HR outlines collective‑bargaining process and pay plan; council raises compression and COLA concerns
Summary
The city’s HR director gave an overview of the public employee collective‑bargaining framework under Florida law and summarized Titusville’s pay plan. Council members asked about pay compression, tiered COLA proposals, range spreads and succession planning; no contract actions were taken.
City staff outlined the collective‑bargaining framework under Florida law and walked council through Titusville’s pay plan during a July 22 presentation, and council members used the briefing to raise questions about pay compression, cost‑of‑living adjustments and succession planning.
The HR director told the City Council that Florida law governing public employee collective bargaining is found in “chapter 447 of the Florida Statutes,” and described the role of the Public Employees Relations Commission in certifying bargaining representatives and overseeing elections. The presenter said the chief executive for bargaining is the city manager and that the HR director typically serves as the employer’s chief negotiator.
On the pay plan, staff showed the city’s current graded ranges (union and nonunion) and described how employees move from hiring minimums toward top‑out ranges through annual cost‑of‑living adjustments (COLAs), promotions and pay studies. Staff noted the service workers’ contract is due to expire Sept. 30 and that the city is preparing for that contract year.
Council members pressed staff on specific issues. Member Stockel described past impasse experience and asked for clarification of the council’s role during “shade” or executive sessions and during formal impasse decisions; staff explained that council members must switch from providing confidential guidance in executive session to a decision‑making role if impasse issues return to the legislative body. Member Mascosa raised concerns about compression where tenured employees can be close to newly hired employees’ pay and asked whether a tiered COLA might address equity; staff said prior pay studies had used hybrid methodologies to address compression and acknowledged the budgetary cost.
Council members also asked about the range‑spread percentage (difference between minimum and maximum), how COLAs are handled for employees already at the maximum (staff said a dollar equivalent or lump sum is often used), and whether formal succession plans exist for departments (staff described banding and credential‑based progression in public works and promotion matrices for police and fire).
No bargaining positions, tentative agreements or ratifications were presented to the council at the meeting; staff emphasized the presentation was informational and that the council would be asked to ratify any complete collective‑bargaining agreement in its entirety if and when the parties reach a tentative agreement.
“Once an agreement is reached … that agreement is brought to the legislative body of the council for ultimately ratification,” the HR presenter said.
The council did not take formal action on the item during the special presentations meeting.
