Joint committee deadlocks on change‑in‑employee‑compensation plans; multiple pay proposals fail

The Joint Finance‑Appropriations Committee spent the Jan. 31 hearing debating four competing Change‑in‑Employee‑Compensation (CEC) proposals but failed to approve any plan, leaving FY2026 salary policy unresolved.

Committee analysts presented four structured motions that differed on methodology (flat dollar per hour, dollar with percent‑floor top‑ups, merit‑based percentage increases, and the governor’s 5% merit recommendation). The measures carried materially different statewide price tags and distribution rules for institutions including colleges, community colleges, state classified and nonclassified employees, IT and engineering positions, and public schools.

Mr. Bybee, the Legislative Services Office analyst, summarized the methodological approach and line‑by‑line dollar totals for the committee. “What you’re going to find in other CEC related actions were things from the CEC committee or from the Governor’s request,” Bybee said, outlining how the motions treated community colleges, IT/engineering pay, trooper pay, and public‑school funding.

Key motions presented: - Motion 1 (Representative Miller): a $1.55 per hour increase per permanent employee where that equates to the stated dollar amount across agencies, plus targeted schedule adjustments and a public‑school allocation; total presented as $177,429,000. Miller seconded the motion; debate followed. - Motion 2 (Representative Furness, substitute): $1.55 per hour plus $611,500 to ensure all state employees receive a minimum 3% increase (with some merit flexibility), totals presented as $178,040,500. Furness’ substitute was seconded by Senator Galloway. - Motion 3 (Senator Cook): a merit‑driven plan combining $1.55 where applicable and up to 4% merit increases; Cook characterized this as providing merit recognition while protecting lower paid workers; totals for that motion were presented in committee materials at roughly $180,312,100. Senator Woodward initially seconded Cook’s motion. - Motion 4 (Governor’s recommendation, Senator Wintrow): a 5% merit increase for permanent employees with related schedule adjustments; document totals presented near $180,653,800. Wintrow asked the committee to consider the printed motion as presented in the packet.

Lawmakers debated principle and practice. Senator Cook and others argued for merit‑based increases to reward high performers and to preserve managerial flexibility; Cook warned against a flat raise that would “declare winners” for everyone regardless of performance in his analogy. Senator Woodward said a flat raise risks creating “participation trophy” outcomes and supported options that included merit. Representative Handy said managers still must motivate employees and noted that asking employees to self‑identify top performers is unreliable: “I asked everybody to put if they thought they were in the top 10% of the performers. Ninety‑five percent of my guys thought they were in the 10%,” Handy said.

The committee took successive roll calls on substitute and original motions. Several attempts failed to secure the required majorities under the committee’s joint‑voting procedure; after repeated votes the committee recessed its consideration. The chair announced that the committee would return to the issue at a later date and that the motions were “too complex to calculate on the flight.”

Outcome: none of the four CEC motions passed during the Jan. 31 hearing. Committee leadership said staff and leadership will rework motions and return with corrected calculations at a future meeting.

Next steps: the committee adjourned the CEC debate without a decision; staff will reconvene to recalculate and refile motions for future consideration.