Consultant tells Pulaski County court salary schedule lags market; recommends opening ranges, annual adjustments and HR oversight

Victoria McGrath, CEO of McGrath Human Resources Group, presented a countywide salary study to the Pulaski County Quorum Court during the Aug. 26, 2025 meeting, outlining findings and recommendations to address recruitment and retention concerns.

Why it matters: McGrath said Pulaski County's current salary schedules cap pay at the midpoint. That practice, the consultant said, compresses pay, reduces promotion and retention incentives and leaves incumbent employees with limited earning pathways compared with external market competitors. The court heard the report and was advised to review materials before the budget committee considers funding options.

Key findings presented

- Workforce age mix and turnover risk: McGrath reported that 39% of the county workforce is under age 40 and about 38% is over age 50, a mix that poses near-term retention and recruitment challenges.

- Market alignment: The consultant said roughly 84% of the county's midpoints and 86% of its maximums are below average market rates for comparable jurisdictions; many employees are being hired at market midpoints rather than the minimum, limiting upward movement.

- Structure and compression: The county uses separate classified and unclassified schedules. The classified schedule contains 16 pay grades and numerous job titles; McGrath said the county's salary range (minimum to maximum) is large but effectively capped because practice ends salary progression at the midpoint. The unclassified schedule has eight pay grades and similar compression.

- Internal equity issues: The study found many duplicate job titles across different pay grades (for example, multiple administrative-assistant levels and multiple network-administrator listings) and inconsistent job descriptions, which complicate pay and promotion decisions.

Recommendations and next steps

- Adopt an externally referenced compensation schedule with defined minimum, midpoint (market) and maximum for each grade and reinstate quartiles to guide hiring and progression.

- Open the salary schedule beyond the current midpoint (McGrath recommended working toward reopening at least to the third quartile and ultimately using the full range to enable advancement).

- Annual schedule maintenance: Review and lift the schedule annually (for example, by using a multi-year CPI-U average) and incorporate an objective movement-through-performance process (e.g., guideline percentages tied to evaluations).

- HR role and governance: Strengthen Human Resources' oversight of job titling, job-description updates, documentation for hiring above minimums, and review of performance evaluations to ensure consistency and legal defensibility.

- Phased approach to implementation: McGrath advised the court to take two weeks to study the report, then direct the agenda and budget committees to consider ordinance language accepting salary scales and to have the budget committee model cost implications. The firm said its costing placed employees at new minimums when estimating initial fiscal impact; additional funding would be required to provide raises to incumbents already paid above new minimums.

Questions from justices and staff

Justices and the HR director asked about methodology, outlier exclusion, the ability to revisit job descriptions, cost estimates and next steps:

- McGrath said her firm eliminated statistical outliers when computing averages (typically one or two low and high data points by position) and that, if a data set dropped below three usable comparables after elimination, that position would be excluded for reliability.

- Job descriptions: McGrath said the study aligned positions using current job descriptions and that department directors may work with HR to submit revised descriptions; HR will review and resubmit updated descriptions as part of the annual process.

- Costs: McGrath said the firm's initial costing exercise placed incumbents at new pay-range minimums; she did not provide a single lump-sum figure for full implementation and cautioned that immediately raising every position to midpoint or eliminating compression would carry significant fiscal impact.

- Timeline: McGrath and county staff recommended the court take the next two weeks to study the materials, submit questions to HR, and allow the budget committee to model options before bringing any ordinance to the court.

What the court will do next

County Human Resources staff offered to collect written questions from justices and forward them to McGrath for written responses. The court was asked to consider drafting an ordinance to accept the proposed salary tables and to ask the budget committee to model funding scenarios before formal adoption. McGrath said she is available to return for committee meetings to address follow-up questions.