A scalpel, not a hacksaw
By Patrick Kelley (Contact)
Originally published 02:13 p.m., July 10, 2008
Updated 02:13 p.m., July 10, 2008
Early in the spring, the Emporia City Commission adopted a new wage scale for city employees and City Manager Matt Zimmerman laid out a new plan for job classifications.
Every city should regularly review how its workers are paid, and establishing a classification system for city employees can be a useful tool in setting wages and controlling the budget.
This year, for the commission, that last part is the important part. The loss of jobs in the community and rapidly rising energy costs have placed the budget is at the center of almost every decision being made at commission meetings.
Emporia is far from alone in its budget woes. On Wednesday, the Lawrence Journal-World reported that the Lawrence City Commission is preparing to take measures much like those already under way in Emporia. The Lawrence goal is to find out whether the city really needs about 1,200 employees to provide basic services. Given the current economic realities, it is likely that Lawrence will find out that it does not need them all.
Across the nation, this process is being repeated and municipal employees are bracing themselves for bad news. People may not be able to control the price of gasoline or food, but they do have some influence over city spending and the taxes that support it.
But city leaders in Emporia and elsewhere must be careful to use pay schedules and job classifications to support fiscal responsibility and increase efficiency, not as a crude tool to cut budgets.
Used wrongly, these tools can strip a city of its most experienced and efficient workers, all in the name of reducing payroll. That is asking for trouble.
The city has made a great investment in the training of its firefighters, police officers and water- and sewer-plant workers. Their training and experience help keep the people of Emporia safe.
Let’s make sure we use the pay schedules and the classification system to reduce waste and to promote equity and stability in the workplace and increase municipal efficiency.
Used wrongly, they could become a butcher knife, cutting away the city’s living flesh.
Comments
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
Posted by dhcc66 (anonymous) on July 10, 2008 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
well put. from the multitude of stories in the last week about catching burglars, to bad auto accidents, to shootings, i don't think we could do with any fewer or less skilled firefighters, medics, or law enforcement. I'm sure some of the victims would agree with that
Posted by flexj66801 (anonymous) on July 10, 2008 at 6:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The wage scale raises came at a price for many city workers. The cost of health insurance went up to rival the raise. In several cases the health insurance increase was higher than the raise received. For example, A city employee with family coverage had an increase of $208.50 a month. As stated in the article, These are hard times. How can someone be expected to make less after receiving a raise & be happy or even content about it. Last I heard, The city employees 257 people, Down from around 300 about the time Commons left. Crews have been working short handed for some time now with words of possibly hiring after the wage scale was completed. They have done an excellent job under demanding circumstances & deserved more than to be given a raise only to have it taken away.
Posted by paulkersey (anonymous) on July 11, 2008 at 2:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Flex--Someone at the city didn't have their raise taken away...
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 11, 2008 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
a lot of people in this town are dealing with increased health care costs and didn't get any raises. I support the city giving raises to employees but the reality is the health care system is broken and it's a bigger issue that what the local governments can fix. It's time to put pressure on Congress to get them to address some serious issues.
Posted by flexj66801 (anonymous) on July 11, 2008 at 5:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You forgot the fact that the city is "self insured" & that the Dept heads receive free health insurance as do many other "higher ranking" positions. So basically it is ok that the front line workers are making less money when they are barely making ends meet. The idea of spending the money for the wage survey in the first place was to bring the city employees up to market value. They were underpaid just as suspected & have been for a long while. Once it was found out how much underpaid they actually were & therefore how much it would cost (a staggering amount I'm sure) to bring all the employees up to par the idea was to take a look at the benefits package. If this isn't setting the table I don't know what is. What they ironically found was the the insurance fund had been under funded for the last five years. So the wage pool that was set aside for the employees raises were used to replenish the health insurance pool. You can't tell me no one knew that the insurance fund was in a crisis before the wage survey that the city spent thousands & thousands of tax dollars to have done. If by some chance no one knew then someone,or better yet A LOT of someones weren't doing their jobs. All the raises turned out to be was a shuffle of funds on paper with a few people actually receiving extra money. On paper you are making more per hour, But its going right back to the insurance fund hence back to the city. Are you catching on to the scam here? Sorry if I don't get in line to applaud the city for wasting the tax dollars for a survey that ultimately had no positive outcome for the employees for which it was intended.
Let me ask you this justthefacts, Did your health insurance go up 208.50 a month just as you received a supposed raise? Or when was the last time your health insurance jumped that much from one week to the next without making changes to coverage or adding a new family member?
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 11, 2008 at 5:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The city is not self insured. They pay for a pool for the costs to administer the plan and to costs of the services. Not all department managers have their insurance paid for them. I know this because I called down there and checked. It's public information. I would suggest others do so before they assume things are one way or another. As for my health insurance, I have to pay my full premiums. My employer does not pay any of them for me. My premiums are $1200 per month. I can expect that the cost will increase about 12 to 18 percent each year. I would suggest you be cautious where you throw out the sympathy statements. Lots of folks struggle. I doubt if you will find too many folks outside the city organization that will be much better off than you are.
Posted by flexj66801 (anonymous) on July 11, 2008 at 6:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nobody is throwing around sympathy cards! Suggesting I be cautious is kind of like fighting on the internet, It is pointless. There are no assumptions here. I'm sure I know enough about the situation I am a part of. It is my understanding that the dept heads insurance is part of their benefits package & if it is not used that is their option. Yes, The city internally will tell you they are self insured regardless of what they tell the public. I've had it beaten into my head for almost the last decade.
In case you missed my point, I said that the survey that was paid for by tax dollars was a waste. In other words, Every citizen should be concerned about that. That is unless you don't mind your taxes being wasted like they have been on this & many other things. I know that people are concerned because every time the powers that be start talking of raising taxes the public goes crazy with reasons why taxes shouldn't be raised, how the city wastes money & to cut this & that. I'm sure we read the same news & you as well as I know this is true. So how is this any different? I pointed out what the survey that all of us paid for was intended to do & the outcome of said survey. I did this from an internal point of view & yes that means I am directly affected. I am not upset or asking for sympathy from anyone. If you must know, I feel it is my responsibility to right what I feel is wrong in my life. If I do not agree with something then it is up to me to change it & if that means changing employers then so be it. But this does not detract the fact that the people have a right to know when their tax dollars are being carefully spent & recklessly thrown out.
Posted by justthefacts (anonymous) on July 11, 2008 at 9:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
They have a right to know the facts. I was questioning your facts. It's all a matter of public record. Based on the information I was provided your information is biased toward an obvious attachment as a city employee or an acquaintance of one. It is obvious to not see the forest for the trees. I suggested caution in making broad generalizations when they may not be accurate. It does a disservice to the community. I have a hard time believing someone would risk criminal charges "telling the public" one thing when it was not the truth. At 7:59 p.m. tonight I spoke to a city department head who showed me their pay stub and guess what??? they are paying a significant amount of health insurance, much larger than the one you spoke about. Since it is a city pay stub and was before the most recent increase, I can only assume it will go up. I also have a hard time believing it was a counterfeit pay stub just to give me the wrong story. I called Sterling Insurance who covers the city insurance and they confirmed they provide insurance services to the city. They confirmed the city is not self insured and that the increase in cost of health insurance was NOT a fund transfer from one city fund to the other. I was also informed today by officials that the wage pool was intended to be used for compensation. Insurance is part of a total compensation package.
You are correct, if you are not comfortable with your current position and you have the job skills and marketability to get into another public sector job or private sector job...good for you. It is the American Dream to always improve yourself and move forward. Good luck. I'm sure someone will replace you that will be quite happy with the city compensation package and security the job provides from layoffs and downsizing.
Post a comment
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. Our goal with this feature is to encourage thoughtful discussions about the news stories. Using the comment feature to make random attacks on people is not acceptable. Emporiagazette.com neither endorses nor guarantees the accuracy of any user contribution. Responsibility for what is posted or contributed to this site is the sole responsibility of each user. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
(Requires free registration.)