Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board stalls on multiple 'step C' hires as county pursues compensation study and bargaining
Summary
Supervisors debated several step‑C hire approvals pulled from the consent calendar while the county finalizes a classification and compensation study and negotiates with bargaining units. Union leaders and employees warned of retention problems; HR described offers as conditional pending board approval.
Several consent‑calendar personnel items that requested step‑C placement for new hires were pulled for discussion, triggering an extended exchange between supervisors, Human Resources, department directors and labor representatives.
Supervisor Joe Wilson said the board should pause step‑C approvals because a countywide compensation study and forthcoming labor negotiations may make those higher starting steps unnecessary. "My purpose for pulling these at this time is because the C advantage that was being put forward... are going to be hopefully unnecessary and redundant," he said.
Neil (Human Resources director) clarified the department’s practice: conditional offers include language noting that increased step placement is contingent upon board approval; employees start at a step A until the board approves any higher placement. HR told the board the offers in question were initiated in September, before the board's more recent direction about steps.
Norma Williams, chapter president for DNCEA SEIU, told the board the practice of hiring mid‑range creates retention problems and inequities: longer‑serving employees reach longevity and can earn more than newer hires who start at higher steps. The DHHS director supplied vacancy figures during the discussion: the department reported 75 vacant positions of 221 allocations (about a 34% vacancy rate), and specific DHHS vacancy rates of roughly 42% for some caseworker positions.
Several supervisors said they supported completing the comp study and the bargaining process before approving additional step‑C placements; the board ultimately took no action on the pulled items at the meeting.
Ending: Supervisors asked HR and negotiators to conclude talks on the compensation study and return proposals; in the interim the pulled step‑C approvals were not granted.
