Consultant: Pulaski County salary schedule is out of market; study recommends policy overhaul and estimates about $425,000 to align minimums

Dr. Victoria McGrath, CEO of McGrath Human Resources Group, told Pulaski County officials that a 2025 compensation study found the county’s pay system “broken” and urged adopting consistent placement policies and a new pay grid so employees can move beyond current market midpoints.

The consultant said the firm reviewed the county’s 2024 schedule, examined job descriptions using a 13-competency point-factor questionnaire and matched positions to external market data. McGrath said the study found many identical job titles placed in different pay grades — “administrative assistant” appeared in nine different pay grades — producing equity concerns and positions that are hard to justify to employees.

Why it matters: McGrath told the panel that range compression and a practice of stopping the salary scale at the market midpoint mean many employees “have nowhere to go,” which reduces retention and raises recruitment costs. Using the county’s 2024 schedule as evaluated in 2025, the presenter said about 68% of minimums were below the average market minimum and that 84% of midpoints were misaligned with market rates.

On cost and timing: Justice Robinson asked whether implementing the schedule requires immediate funding. McGrath said the firm’s August 2025 estimate to bring minimums to the recommended ranges was “almost $425,146,” but she cautioned that the number may be different now because wages and interim raises have changed since the study was finalized.

Method and comparables: Members pressed McGrath on data sources and legal exposure. McGrath described directly contacting municipal HR offices for salary schedules and incumbent/benefit information, aligning titles via a consultant, and using a proprietary formula to remove outliers. She confirmed the firm used private-sector data where appropriate but warned that private employers are less likely to disclose salary details. Asked whether a schedule must be “legally defensible” in a right-to-work state, McGrath said pay-equity claims can arise from inconsistent placement and that a defensible methodology helps the county respond if employees allege discrimination.

Policy recommendations: McGrath recommended adopting consistent policies on position placement and pay-grade changes as an initial step, then gradually opening hiring ranges into at least the third quartile so employees have room to progress. She emphasized the study evaluates positions — responsibilities, education, experience — not individual incumbents, and said rank or level differences (assistant, specialist) are appropriate when duties differ.

Implementation issues: Officials probed whether the county could adopt a classification framework without immediately funding raises; the consultant and staff said adoption of a schedule (a policy) is possible, but the comptroller and HR would need to address funding, appeal processes and implementation details. McGrath said the firm did not build a formal appeal process into the study because the county did not adopt the schedule, and advised HR to clarify local procedures for reclassification or employee appeals.

Board reaction and next steps: Several members expressed appreciation for the work and asked follow-up questions about data sources and whether the numbers remain current; McGrath said her methodology has evolved but is consistently applied and suggested the county move toward consistent placement policies even if fiscal constraints delay full funding. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn and no public comment recorded.