County consultant presents compensation study recommending new pay structures and law‑enforcement step system

A compensation study performed for Gloucester County by Bolton Rewards was presented to the Board of Supervisors on July 8, with consultants recommending a redesigned pay structure, clearer job titling conventions, an updated job‑evaluation method and a step pay structure for law‑enforcement positions.

Dan Rippberger, president of Bolton Rewards, summarized the firm’s work: job‑by‑job analysis, benchmarking against a custom peer group and national published surveys, and proposals for a new grade‑and‑range system with a market‑target at the 50th percentile of the county’s relevant labor market. The firm advised consolidating existing grade counts, tightening job titles to reduce perceived inconsistencies, and implementing a job‑evaluation tool that relies on standard compensable factors (skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions).

For law enforcement the firm recommended a step structure that provides predictable, tenure‑based increases and helps recruitment and retention; consultant and staff said the current system’s small annual step (0.66 percent in current practice) provides limited compression relief. The study recommended that non‑law‑enforcement roles be placed on the new grade structure, with a range midpoint targeted at the 50th percentile and defined entry, midpoint and maximum pay points.

Consultants said job descriptions in the county were generally well written but that titles and the implementation rules for grading sometimes created confusion and perceptions of unfairness. Bolton Rewards advised an implementation plan that includes finalizing job‑to‑grade assignments, defining starting pay rules (for example, how much prior experience counts), estimating the budgetary impact, and communicating changes to managers and employees.

Board members asked about differences between public‑ and private‑sector pay and how the recommended structure accounts for local labor market differences. The consultant said national survey data were adjusted geographically to reflect local labor costs and that the consultant had recruited participation from about 16 local jurisdictions for a custom survey sample. The consultant and county staff said cost estimates for implementation would be provided to the board before any adoption decisions; department heads have already been reviewing grade assignments and experience counts for their staff.

No action was taken at the meeting; supervisors said they wanted time to review the consultant’s recommendations and the county’s fiscal capacity before voting on changes.