Board to consider pay-grade changes, market adjustments and handbook edits at June meeting

The Eau Claire Area School District presented a labor market review and proposed employee handbook clarifications to the Board of Education and asked the Board to reserve the items for action at its June meeting.

Executive Director Gold outlined a multi-pronged approach to salary review — cost-of-living adjustments tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), market adjustments from an external audit, level movement on pay schedules, and internal-audit checks on how new hires are placed on scales. Gold told the Board the most recent CPI figure used in the analysis was 3.4%.

Gold said the district contracts with an external firm (identified in the presentation as CBIS) to compare job descriptions and pay grades with market peers and to recommend reclassifications. That consultant’s recommendations flagged multiple positions the firm proposed moving “up one grade level.” Gold presented three administrative options for implementation: (1) move every affected position level-for-level as recommended, (2) move employees to the nearest step that provides an increase (a less costly option), or (3) delay action for a year; a fourth option discussed was to wait for the state budget to be finalized before acting.

Gold noted the district follows a five‑year review cycle and is again evaluating hourly staff in the current rotation. Board materials showed a district review of payroll and budget context, and Gold said the district tries to balance fiscal sustainability with competitive pay.

Board members pressed for clarity about timing and equity. One board member said the district’s hourly positions are particularly exposed to the local labor market and urged prompt action so the district can retain and recruit essential staff such as food-service workers and other hourly roles. Other board members emphasized the need to avoid internal inequity that can arise when new hires are placed above longer-serving employees; Gold described internal-audit steps to reduce “leapfrogging” on scales when new staff are hired.

Board members discussed the fiscal tradeoffs — for example, increasing staff or reducing class size versus adding targeted positions and market adjustments — and asked administrators to continue refining cost estimates. Gold offered alternatives (level-for-level placement, nearest-step increases, delaying implementation, or waiting for the state budget) and said the district would return with figures and a recommendation.

The Board did not vote on pay changes at the meeting. Trustees agreed administratively to place the labor-market recommendations and employee-handbook modifications on the agenda for the June Board meeting for formal Board action. The handbook items described minor clarifications (for example, consistent statutory citations, FTE clarifications and a bereavement policy update to explicitly include miscarriage-related bereavement). Gold said the handbook clarifications reflect current practice and are not substantive policy changes.

In discussion of handbook changes, a Board member asked how bias in mandatory reporting is identified and handled. Administrators said district staff are trained to make mandated reports when they encounter concern; the formal investigation and any determination of bias is handled by the child-protective agency (DHS) or the appropriate investigative body, and the district follows up with staff training and coordination as needed.

Administrators signaled they would bring a clear recommendation and associated cost estimates back to the Board in June, and several Board members said they favored acting at the June meeting rather than delaying until the state budget was finalized.