Committee deadlocks on change-in-employee-compensation; multiple CEC proposals fail to pass

The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee considered four competing change-in-employee-compensation (CEC) proposals on Jan. 31 but did not adopt any of them. Committee members debated whether to use a flat dollar-per-hour increase, merit-based increases, or the governor's 5% merit proposal; after multiple roll calls and procedural challenges the panel deferred final action to a future date.

The packet presented four principal options:

- A flat-dollar approach centered on $1.55 per hour per FTP with distribution flexibility to agency heads (referred to in the packet as a $1.55-per-hour option). The motion presented by Representative Miller (motion 1 in the packet) calculated that amount as $84,411,000 for state employees with related allocations for community colleges and public schools, totaling $177,429,000 in adjustments across fund sources.

- A modified $1.55 option that included an additional $611,500 to ensure a 3% minimum increase for higher-paid employees (motion advanced by Representative Furness/Furnace in later discussion as a substitute).

- A merit-based option providing up to 4% distributed on merit, with differing calculations for colleges and other institutions (referred to as motion 3 and advanced in discussion by Senator Cook).

- The governor's recommendation: a 5% increase distributed on merit, which was presented as motion 4 and was also debated.

Speakers emphasized competing policy goals. Senator Cook and others urged merit-based increases, saying supervisors should be able to reward higher performers. "If we're a flat pay raise with no ability for a supervisor to recognize great employees ... that's a participation trophy," Senator Cook said, arguing for merit adjustments. Other members emphasized inflation relief and the administrative simplicity of a flat-dollar approach; Representative Handy noted that many employees view themselves as top performers and warned merit systems can create management headaches.

Members also discussed technical calculations in the packet: for example, the packet showed the $1.55-per-hour figure applied differently across agency salary distributions, and staff explained how amounts were computed for colleges, community colleges and public schools. Mr. Bybee described methodology decisions and specific line items for trooper pay, IT and engineering differentials, and nursing/healthcare worker adjustments.

Several roll-call attempts produced no passage. On repeated votes the substitute and original motions failed to achieve the required majorities under the committee's voting procedure; committee leadership invoked a standing letter outlining how joint votes would be tallied (the letter states House and Senate majority leadership determined to utilize a joint voting procedure used in past years and that a bill must receive a majority support from the joint committee and separately from each chamber to proceed). The committee cited precedent and that letter in determining the ruling for the day.

After several failed roll calls and changes of individual votes during calls, the committee chair announced that no CEC motion had passed and that members would return to the issue at a later meeting. Staff were thanked for preparing the motions and the committee adjourned.