Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City consultant recommends pay-scale changes; proposed cost ~ $3.13 million including benefits
Summary
A consultant reported that East Point’s pay ranges trail the market and recommended a hybrid parity approach for general government staff and a 15-step time-in-rank plan for public safety, with an estimated annual cost—including benefits—of about $3.13 million.
A consultant told the East Point City Council on April 14 that the city’s pay ranges are below market and recommended citywide changes to classification and compensation to improve recruitment and retention.
Mark Holcomb, project manager for Evergreen Solutions, presented results from phase 2 of a compensation and classification study. He said the market-comparison work showed the city’s pay ranges were generally 15–30% below the market median for comparable metro employers in the sample. "The market results did indicate that the city was below the market," Holcomb said.
For general government positions, Evergreen recommended a "hybrid parity" implementation—an approach the city used in phase 1—to place affected employees into updated pay ranges while avoiding extreme rate compression. For police and fire positions, the consultant recommended a separate step plan with 15 steps and a time-in-rank progression so public-safety employees incrementally advance; Evergreen proposed one step per year as an appropriate approach.
Holcomb said the estimated fiscal impact of the recommended adjustments—including pension and insurance costs—is about $3,130,000 annually. City HR staff said they have detailed estimates and will work with finance to translate the consultant’s high-level estimate into implementation timelines and budget impacts.
Council members asked operational questions about timing and implementation. Councilmember Schrodscheider asked whether the city had copies of the consultant’s recommendations; human-resources staff said the full report and options are available and that the proposed approach mirrors phase 1, which the council adopted 07/01/2024. Councilmember Butler and others pressed for clarity on how public-safety steps would be applied; Holcomb said steps would be annual and that a 15-step scale would typically move an employee from entry to top of scale over roughly 15 years.
Several councilmembers raised the question of retroactivity. Mayor and council asked staff for cost scenarios showing the impact of an April 1 start date versus a July 1 start date and for a precise fiscal-year cost estimate. Staff committed to return with detailed numbers for both start dates so council can consider whether to implement changes mid-year or in the next budget cycle.
HR and finance staff briefed the council that phase 1 (implemented July 1, 2024) raised minimum wages and revised pay scales for select positions; phase 2 would address remaining classifications, including department directors and other roles not covered in phase 1.
Councilmember discussion included the frequency of future pay studies; staff said the recommended shelf life is two to three years to keep pay ranges competitive. Council directed staff to prepare implementation options, cost impacts for an April 1 versus July 1 start date, and employee-communication plans before the next meeting.
The discussion will return to council after staff provides the requested budget estimates and an implementation recommendation.
