Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Davidson County moves on 9‑1‑1/EMS pay and recruitment measures; board approves headhunter extension and data tracking
Summary
Faced with rising vacancies in the county’s 9‑1‑1 center and EMS, commissioners approved a pay adjustment for telecommunicators, extended contracts with recruitment firms, and directed staff to track retention; staff also described a state-funded automated dispatch (Locution) system proposal that the 9‑1‑1 board would largely fund.
Davidson County commissioners on May 1 voted to pursue a mix of pay adjustments and recruitment strategies aimed at reducing vacancies in the county’s 9‑1‑1 call center and emergency-medical services, and they approved an extension of recruitment/placement contracts while asking staff to report back on retention.
Commissioners discussed a prolonged shortage of telecommunicators (TCs) and EMS staff. County 9‑1‑1 and EMS staff described vacancy rates that have crept upward in recent months and attributed recent departures largely to higher pay offers from neighboring centers, hospitals and private ambulance companies. Staff described the competitive regional market: some neighboring jurisdictions — notably High Point and Guilford Metro — have raised starting pay and implemented aggressive pay incentives, which County staff said has increased recruitment pressure.
After deliberation the board signaled support for an immediate pay adjustment intended to improve competitiveness for 9‑1‑1 hiring. Commissioners agreed to increase the starting hourly pay for telecommunicators from the current rate (discussed as approximately $18.08 in the transcript) to $20 per hour, with a night shift differential rising to $23 per hour; commissioners noted the planned state cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) would apply on top of this. The board voted in favor of the adjustment.
On recruitment, county staff briefed the board on the results of recent use of two recruiting firms: one paid per successful hire and another hired under a flat monthly arrangement. Staff reported that the contingency recruiter produced a higher percentage hire rate but at a higher per‑hire cost; the flat-fee firm delivered a lower percentage of hires. The board agreed to continue recruitment contracts for roughly six months and asked staff to track retention for hires secured through those firms, including whether recruits are still employed six months and one year after hire.
Commissioners also approved a bundle of administrative recruitment measures previously used in the county: a referral bonus for employees who refer a successful hire (the structure described by staff is $500 at hire and an additional payment after a one‑year retention milestone), a re‑instated cash‑for‑ride / extra-shift incentive program with a clarified part‑time-hour threshold (part‑time employees would need to meet a 60‑hour minimum to qualify), and a referral effort targeted to paramedics where “refer-a-friend” may have higher returns because of tight professional networks.
The 9‑1‑1 director (Rob) briefed the board on a separate proposal to install Locution, an automated call‑dispatch interface. Rob said the county’s regional 9‑1‑1 board has approved most of the purchase and will cover the annual maintenance; the county would be asked to cover a one-time server/radio interface cost (discussed at about $27,000 in the presentation). Rob said the automated dispatch system is expected to reduce dispatch times for fire and EMS responses and that 9‑1‑1 maintenance costs would be funded through the 9‑1‑1 board’s carryover funds if the board signs the contract.
Board members requested additional performance data, including: vacancy history, academy graduation and retention rates, hires by source (which recruiting firm, in‑house, etc.), and post-hire retention at six months and one year. Commissioners asked that staff return with the requested spreadsheeted data at six‑month intervals to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of recruiters and incentive programs.
On staffing strategy for EMS, commissioners and staff discussed a range of measures — recruitment contracts, part‑time threshold reductions, in‑house training and apprenticeship/partnership models — and emphasized the need to balance hiring incentives against long-term sustainability. Staff noted paramedic recruitment is particularly constrained because hospitals and private employers can offer substantially higher wages for experienced paramedics.
The board approved the recruitment-contract extension and the incentive program trial, and approved the telecommunicator pay adjustment by voice vote; commissioners asked staff to bring back retention metrics and cost estimates for the next six-month review.
