Vernon County committee asks staff for options to implement Policy 05-19 anniversary pay increases

Vernon County—s General Government Committee on June 5 asked human resources staff to bring back implementation options and cost figures for Policy 05-19, the county—s salary-plan provision that would shift step increases from a single January payment to each employee—s anniversary date.

The request came after department heads described concern among employees who received step increases in January and now worry they will have to wait longer for future increases. "They feel that they're going to be missing out on wages," Tricia, who introduced the policy discussion for Human Resources, said during the meeting. Committee members directed staff to return with phased or prorated options rather than an "all-or-nothing" approach.

Why it matters: The change is intended to reduce pay compression created when all step increases have been paid simultaneously in January. Under the currently written Policy 05-19, step increases would be paid on each employee—s date-of-hire anniversary, rather than on Jan. 1. That will change the timing of pay increases for roughly half of the county—s workforce who are on a step system.

What the committee heard: Tricia told the committee that, historically, step increases were given in January; the policy moves increases to anniversary dates to address compression across departments. "With the new system, we had suggested that we now start doing increases on their anniversary date," she said. Department heads described real-world effects: an employee hired in October could receive a step increase the following October, then another in January under the old calendar — effectively receiving two raises in short order.

Department heads and committee members asked for detailed scenarios. "If we can make it work, it seems like a good approach to try to honor that feedback, so long as the cost isn't prohibitive," one committee member said. Staff said they can calculate the individual prorated amounts manually and that some individual shortfalls already appear to range up to roughly $1,400 in the transition year for the most affected employees.

Next steps and distinction between discussion and decision: The committee did not change the policy at the meeting. Instead it directed staff to return next month with: (1) cost estimates for full implementation as written; (2) phasing options (semiannual, quarterly, or individually prorated); and (3) an individual-level spreadsheet showing the transition amounts. Tricia said the county—s new HRIS system will handle anniversary-date increases once implemented, and staff recommended using the budget process to coordinate any cost-of-living and policy timing changes. No formal vote was taken to modify Policy 05-19.

Context and constraints: Committee members emphasized communication and fairness to employees during any transition. Several speakers noted that some employees had already benefited from earlier increases paid in January, and the proposed change reallocates the timing rather than changing the total pay pool. Department heads noted the implementation work is manual this year because the new HRIS payroll/time system is not yet live.

Ending: Staff will return in July with the requested scenarios and figures to help the committee set a specific approach before the 2026 budget process.