HomeMy WebLinkAbout28. C. Compensation Study as requested by Council CITY HALL
215 Church Avenue
P.O.Box 1130
Oshkosh,Wisconsin City ty of Oshkosh
OIHKOIH
Memorandum
Date: February 9, 2012
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
From: Mark Rohloff, City Manager , f._ 1e
Re: Classification and Compensation Study —Addendum by Carlson Consulting
At your January 11, 2012 workshop, Council reviewed questions posed by Council and
staff regarding the classification and compensation completed by Carlson Consulting.
As a result of that workshop, Council asked Mr. Carlson to analyze four options,
including the original recommendation contained in his December 2, 2011 report.
At Tuesday's meeting, Mr. Carlson will provide an overview of his report addendum,
explain the reasoning behind his analysis and recommendations, and answer any
questions that Council may have based on Mr. Carlson's addendum and presentation.
No Council action is being requested at this meeting. It is my hope that Council will
provide Mr. Carlson and staff with sufficient direction so that we may have a resolution
for Council to approve at the February 28, 2012 Council meeting.
I have attached an addendum to Mr. Carlson's report addressing the following options:
1. Move forward with the plans as originally recommended in Mr. Carlson's
December 2, 2011 report.
2. Add a 20% pay-for-performance band to the General Employee group so both
plans have similar structure with performance-based pay opportunities.
3. Modify the General Employee pay plan so that the minimum rates of the
ranges are 90% of the range control points with step progression to 110% of
the control points.
4. Create a single pay plan covering all employees that supports pay-for-
performance for all staff.
I support Mr. Carlson's recommendation of option # 4 which creates a single pay plan
with a pay for performance feature for all impacted employees. While the department
managers (and their employees) will be challenged to venture into relatively new
territory for public sector employees, I believe that staff is up to the challenge and is
willing to commit to performance based management that can not only serve as a basis
0
for a relevant pay system, but also move our organization towards greater
accountability. I am pleased to work closely with Council on establishing goals for me to
work on during 2012. I believe that these goals will provide direction to department
managers and staff about how Council envisions this performance based system will
work.
cc: Charlie Carlson, Carlson Consulting, LLC
John Fitzpatrick, Assistant City Manager/ Director of Administrative Services
CITY OF OSHKOSH, WI
JOB CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY
REPORT ADDENDUM
February 9, 2012
CARLSON CONSULTING LLC
Middleton, WI
In December, we presented our report with recommendations for a modified
compensation system that would require substantial changes in pay structure and
delivery. In our report, we recommended two distinctly new pay plans.
For the management/professional employee group, we recommended the City
replace the current plan with a new plan that would:
1. Reduce the number of active pay grades from 17 to 10.
2. Establish ranges that:
a. Sets the Control Point based on the market regression analysis.
b. Increases range maximums from 112.5%of the Control Point to 120%.
3. Continue the policy of pay step progression from the range Minimum to the
Control Point based on annual performance reviews that at least meet
expectations.
4. Make all pay increases between the Control Point and the Maximum solely
based on pay-for-performance.
5. Allocate all positions to at least the minimum salary of the appropriate pay range
based upon job evaluation scores.
6. Place any employee whose current pay is between the range Minimum and the
Control Point on the step immediately higher.
7. Red-circle any employee whose pay is higher than the new range Maximum until
the pay range is equal to or greater than the current rate.
MANAGEMENT/PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (Effective 1/1/2012)
PTS IN GRADE 87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% PAY FOR 120.0%
GRADE FR TO MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONTROL PERFORM MAX
MP10 1126 1232 47.76 49.12 50.49 51.85 53.22 54.58 4 65.50
MP9 1024 1125 43.58 44.83 46.07 47.32 48.56 49.81 4 5937
MP8 931 1023 39.79 40.93 42.06 43.20 44.34 45.47 4 54_57
MP7 847 930 36.34 37.38 38.42 39.46 40.49 41.53 4 49.84
M P6 770 846 33.21 34.15 3510 36.05 37.00 37.95 4 45.54
M P5 700 769 30.36 31.22 32.09 32.96 33.82 34.69 4 41.63
M P4 636 699 27.76 28.56 29.35 30.14 -30.94 31.73 4 38.08
MP3 579 635 25.41 26.13 26.86 27.59 28.31 29.04 4 34.85
MP2 526 578 23.27 23.93 24.60 25.26 25.93 26.59 4 31.91
MP1 475 525 21.32 21.93 22.54 23.15 23.76 24.37 4 29.24
1
For the general employee group, we recommended the following plan:
GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN (Effective January 1, 2012)
PTS IN GRADE 87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0%
GRADE FR TO MIN. STEP 2 SI EP 3 STEP 4 STEP S MAX.
GS 519+ 22.40 23.04 23.68 24.32 24.96 25.60
64 432 518 19.57 20.13 20.69 21.25 21.81 22.36
G3 361 431 16.52 17.00 17.47 17.94 18.41 18.88
62 300 360 14.04 14.44 14.84 15.24 15.64 16.04
61 <1= 299 11.90 12.24 12.58 12.92 13.26 13.60
This plan for General employees would have the following characteristics. It would:
1. Reduce the number of pay grades from dozens to five.
2. Establish ranges with maximums that are based on the regression results for the
area market data.
3. Establish six pay steps in each grade with progression occurring in annual
increments provided performance meets expectations.
4. Allocate all positions to the appropriate pay range based upon job evaluation
scores.
5. Place any employee whose current pay is between the range Minimum and the
range Maximum on the step immediately higher.
6. Red-circle the pay of any employee whose pay is higher than the new range
Maximum until the pay range is equal to or greater than the current rate.
We noted that the financial impact of the new general employee pay plan should be
significant over the next several years with a lasting long-term impact in reduced payroll
expenses. No additional City funds would be necessary to implement our
recommendations, and when fully implemented, we estimated that City payroll
expenditures could be reduced by more than $1 million.
We noted that the new pay plans will take time to fully implement, and since we
don't know when employees will resign or retire in the future, it's difficult to estimate
financial impact precisely. However, City Human Resources has determined that up to
25%of the workforce is "retirement eligible" in 2012, so substantial near-term turnover
is likely, especially as the economy improves.
The City Council received and filed our report and commenced a review process that
could result in legislation this month. The City Manager led a video briefing for City staff
2
following presentation of the report to the City Council, we prepared responses to
"frequently asked questions" (FAQs) and the City posted an FAQ document for review.
On January 14,the Council convened a workshop to give employees an opportunity to
state their concerns and ask questions.
The Council concluded the workshop with a request to the City Manager that he
return to the Council in February with three additional options for discussion and action.
Our original recommendation plus the three new options are:
1. Move forward with the plans as originally recommended.
2. Add a 20% pay-for-performance band to the General Employee group so both
plans have similar structure with performance-based pay opportunities.
3. Modify the General Employee pay plan so that the minimum rates of the ranges
are 90%of the range control points with step progression to 110%of the control
points.
4. Create a single pay plan covering all employees that supports pay-for-
performance for all staff.
(We note again that none of these options cover protective service or transit staff;
those groups are in bargaining units that continue to have full collective bargaining
rights. Their schedules are being negotiated separately. Management positions for
those groups are covered by the plans under discussion.)
Pay Plan Options
Option 1—Moving forward with the plans as originally recommended.
Advantages:
1. Pay-for-performance is easier to implement because it covers only managers and
professional staff.
2. The City is compensating at a premium on the market now for many General
employee classifications, and a progression step structure to the new control
points will help lower payroll costs resulting from annual step increases.
Disadvantages:
1. Having two plans risks perpetuating an employee relations culture of we/them
or non-union/union.
2. Approximately 80%of the General employee group will be red-circled with
serious morale consequences.
Option 2—Add a 20%pay-for-performance band to the General Employee group.
The Management/Professional pay plan would be as proposed, and the pay plan for
General Employees implementing this option would be as follows:
3
CITY OF OSHKOSH
GENERAL EMPLOYEE PAY PLAN
WITH PAY FOR PERFORMANCE
PTS IN GRADE 87.5% 90.096 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% PAY FOR 1200%
CONTROL
GRADE FR TO MIN. STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 POINT PERFORM MAX
GS 519+ 22.40 23.04 2168 24.32 24.96 25.60 4 30.73
G4 432 518 19.57 20.13 20.69 21.25 21.81 2236 4 26:84
G3 361 431 16.52 17.00 17.47 17.94 18.41 1828 4 22.66
G2 300 360 14.04 14.44 14.84 15.24 15.64 16.04 3 19.25
GI <1= 299 11.90 12.24 12.58 12.92 13.26 13.60 4 16.33
Advantages:
1. Creates an employee relations culture that gives all covered staff an opportunity
to earn performance-based pay and can encourage higher performance across
all job classifications.
2. The percentage of red-circled General Employees declines significantly from 80%
to 24%,which is likely to support higher morale. The City is compensating at a
premium on the market now for the remaining red-circled General employee
classifications and a progression step structure to the new control points will
help lower payroll costs resulting from annual step increases.
Disadvantages:
1. Having two plans risks perpetuating an employee relations culture of we/them
or non-union/union.
2. Increases the immediate pressure on management to create a performance
management system that will support pay-for-performance for all covered staff.
3. Having higher pay range maximums for General Employees will not save the City
as much money as the plan is implemented over the coming years.
Option 3-Modify the General Employee pay plan so that the minimum rates of the
ranges are 90%of the range control points with step progression to 110%of the control
points.
One of the options requested by Council Member Jef Hall was a step system
alternative for the General Employee group that would target the going rate for the job
(Control Point) that is 110%of the market average. We have prepared a pay plan based
on this alternative on the assumption that it is a modification of Option 1 and does not
extend performance-based pay to this group and does not extend the 90/110 step plan
to the Management/Professional group. We understand this alternative would be as
follows:
4
OPTIONS-STEPS FROM 90%TO 110%OF AREA MARKET
PTS IN GRADE 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 102.5% 105.0% 107.5% 110.0%
GRADE FR TO MIN. STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 CONTROL STEP 6 STEP 7 STEP 8 MAX.
POINT
65 519+ 23.04 23.68 24.32 24.96 25.60 26.24 26.88 27.53 28.17
G4 432 518 20.13 20.69 21.25 21.81 22.36 22.92 23.48 24.04 24.60
G3 361 431 17.00 17.47 17.94 18.41 18.88 19.36 19.83 20.30 20.77
G2 300 360 14,44 14.84 15.24 15.64 16.04 16.45 16.85 17.25 17.65
61 <1= 299 12.24 12.58 12.92 13.26 13.60 13.94 14.28 14.63 14.97
Advantages:
1. Creates a higher market position for General Employees so the City is not limiting
pay progression to the average market rate.
2. Provides more economic protection to employees to temper the potential policy
changes of future City Councils.
Disadvantages:
1. Having two plans risks perpetuating an employee relations culture of we/them
or non-union/union.
2. Increases the amount of fixed payroll costs due to pay step progression.
3. Having higher pay range maximums for General Employees will not hold down
future payroll costs as much as the original plan.
Note: This option was proposed by Council Member Hall at the January 24
Workshop session. In a subsequent meeting with Mr. Hall, he indicated that he may
propose a variation on this option at the February 14 session. We summarized the
advantages and disadvantages of the option as we understood it and Mr. Hall may wish
to elaborate on any variation to this option.
Option 4-Create a single pay plan covering all employees that supports pay-for-
performance for all staff.
Pay plan development in this project has evolved. Our starting point was a
traditional step system for managers,with step advancement based on performance
that at least meets expectations. The City adopted this plan over ten years ago. The
majority of the City of Oshkosh workforce (over 500 of the 600+ employees) have been
covered by collective bargaining agreements with automatic progression involving a
multitude of ranges with automatic step increases.
Those labor agreements expired on December 31, 2011, and changes in Wisconsin
bargaining legislation precluded bargaining on wage structures for employees who are
not protective service or transit workers. Changes in employee relations law obligated
5
the City to determine new pay structures for the compensation management of over
200 staff. The base pay for these employees had been regulated by multiple wage
scales that everyone acknowledged had internal equity flaws, were difficult to manage,
and needed to be replaced.
Our early policy discussions with the Council resulted in direction to develop two
plans: one for managers and professional staff that was linked to public sector markets
and would support performance based pay and a second for hourly-based employees
that reflected a more traditional step plan linked to area labor markets. The two plans
presented in our report reflected that policy direction.
This approach, however,would result in a pay program that is particularly harsh for
the hourly-based staff. Almost 180 employees would be red-circled, many of them for
several years, assuming a gradual recovery to more normal economic conditions.
The City's commitment to performance management has grown during the course
of this study, and the City has become concerned that two plans would perpetuate a
two-class culture. Therefore, the City Administration and Council members asked, what
would a single plan that gave everyone an opportunity for performance-based pay look
like?
Based on our analysis, the regression line and pay equation would be:
SINGLE PAY LINE
$60.00
$50.00
y=$0.047x-$.12
$40.00 — =oss
•
$30.O0
$20.00
• ..........
$10.00
$0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Job Evaluation Scores for Benchmark Positions
The resulting policy line is based on a solid set of benchmarks and reflects a very
high correlation (0.96) between job evaluation scores and market survey rates for the
benchmarks. An appropriate interpretation would be that 96%of the variance in survey
6
results is accounted for by job evaluation scores. This is a very sound basis for a single
line pay plan. (The benchmark data is enclosed as Attachment 1.)
A unitary pay plan with control points based on the market equation from this
statistical relationship, range minimums at 87.5%of the control point, five annual steps
to reach the control point (average market rate) based upon performance meeting
objectives, and pay-for-performance eligibility available to all staff would be as follows:
PTS IN GRADE 87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% PAY FOR 120+0%
GRADE FR TO MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONTROL PERFORM MAX
M >1125 48.38 49.76 51.15 52.53 53.91 $55.29 3 $66.35
1 1024 1125 43.97 45.23 46.49 47.74 49.00 $50.25 4 $60.31
K 931 1023 39.97 41.11 42.25 43.39 44.53 $45.67 3 $54.81
J 847 930 36.32 37.36 38.40 39.44 40.47 $41.51 4 $49.81
770 846 33.01 3395 34.90 35.84 36.78 $37.73 4 S45.27
H 700 769 30.00 30.86 31.71 32.57 33.43 $34.29 3 $41.14
G 636 699 27.26 28.04 28.82 29.60 30.38 $31.16 3 $37.39
F 579 635 24.78 25.48 26.19 26.90 27.61 $28.32 '3 $33.98
E 526 578 22.51 23.16 23.80 24.44 25.09 $25.73 4 $30.88
Q 432 525 20A6 21.04 21.63 22.21 22.80 $23.38 $28.06
C 361 431 16.18 16.64 17.11 17.57 18.03 $18.49 3 $22.19
8 300 360 13.47 13.85 14.24 14.62 15.01 $15.39 3 $18.47
A <300 1039 1039 11.19 11.50 11.80 $12.10 3 $14.52
The classification listing for this pay plan is included as Attachment 2.
Advantages:
1. A single plan removes all distinctions between employee groups and promotes
organizational unity.
2. All covered staff would be eligible for pay-for-performance.
3. A single plan supports uniform salary administration.
Disadvantages:
1. A single plan with performance pay eligibility for all covered staff increases the
immediate pressure on management to create a performance management
system.
7
2. Having higher pay range maximums for previously described General Employees
will not save the City as much money as the plan is implemented over the
coming years.
Recommendation
First of all, although the work required to move to a performance-based pay system
would be extensive, we want to emphasize that the City of Oshkosh isn't starting from
scratch in creating a performance measurement environment. The City already is using
performance management in several departments for both management and union
positions. In addition, all departments have been using basic performance management
for the non-union group to verify that performance at least meets expectations to
qualify for a step increase.
Where the City needs to improve is in building out its performance management
system so that it operates across the organization in a consistent manner. This will be
an evolution from a basic system to more complex variations as implementation takes
hold. Probably the most difficult task will be training first and second line supervisors in
effective performance evaluation and communication.
We also want to stress that performance-based pay isn't just about individual
performance and individual pay increases. It's likely the City will devise certain payouts
that are based on group performance and group outcomes.
In our experience, there are three necessary conditions that must be met if an
organization is going to have a successful performance-based pay program.
1)The pay structure has to be internally equitable.
We believe the extension of the City's point factor job evaluation system to all
employees (protective service and transit staff excluded) with a simplified pay structure,
an appeal process, and a program for on-going classification administration will enable
the City to keep its system equitable internally. As jobs change in the future, and they
will change, we can apply the point factor system to determine an accurate grade
allocation.
2)There must be sound performance measures with a system that provides
feedback to staff and an accurate performance score.
To meet this challenge, the City Manager has indicated that he will assign program
development responsibilities to the Assistant City Manager/Director of Administrative
Services and promote the Human Resource Generalist to Human Resource Manager to
handle day-to-day division responsibilities. In addition,the City Manager will assign the
Management Assistant to work with departments to create objectives and measures.
The City has a basic performance management tool sufficient to support its step pay
program. Moving to a more "open" range pay delivery model will require better
measurement.
8
Following our discussions regarding system design,the City Manager has committed
to the following quarterly implementation sequence schedule for system design in 2012:
• Q2— Department Heads
• Q3— Managers and Supervisors
• Q4—All Employees
This is major commitment that can succeed. To develop performance standards and
measures, a key source staff will use is the Job Description Questionnaire (JDQ)
completed for this study. In completing the JDQ each employee was asked to specify
how each essential job duty could be measured, so there is significant, sound, current
information to build upon.
One of the biggest challenges in managing performance evaluations for over 400
staff is system management. Fortunately, the supporting tools are now available. The
City has vendor experience with a firm called NEOGOV (www.NEOGOV.com)for all of its
recruitment management, and we are in discussions with NEOGOV for a contract for the
firm's performance management software module. Human Resources and our firm
have reviewed the software.
I feel confident recommending this application to the City. The Human Resource
staff and our firm believe that the application will enable the City to develop its
performance measures job-by-job, load them into the software application, and manage
the process in a very timely, hands-on manner.
The City has to commit itself to success and consistency, and this commitment has
to be from the top of organization. We note that the City Manager now has
implementation of a performance management system in 2012 as one of the
performance targets agreed upon with the City Council. That's the right place to start.
It is expected the City Manager and all department heads would implement a
performance management program for their positions that is consistent with the City's
strategic objectives. Next, the department heads will have to create performance
expectations and measures for all managers and supervisors. Finally, the system will be
extended to all staff.
The city strongly emphasizes effective communication regarding service
performance. Externally the City has programs involving community surveys about
municipal services, and an initiative with the International City Management Association
regarding service benchmarks.
One of the challenges to be met head on is adapting the internal communication
patterns caused by changes in collective bargaining as we have known it traditionally.
To address this concern,we recommend the City also develop two formal internal
communication processes:
The first involves creating focus groups that are representative of the entire
workforce to work with Human Resources through the performance management
design and implementation phases. The focus group leader should be from outside the
9
organization to insure objectivity. Focus groups will surface employee concerns and
ideas for effective implementation.
The second feedback initiative requires creating an employee opinion/satisfaction
survey that can be administered anonymously on a regular basis to measure employee
viewpoints on a variety of important issues, including the performance management
system. This approach will give all employees a voice that will be heard with results that
can be used to track progress.
In order to be successful, the new system also needs a chance to become better.
The City is not going to get everything right the first time, or the second, or the third
performance measurement cycle. However, with resource dedication, commitment to
success, and good feedback mechanisms,the City can develop the accuracy and
consistency necessary for acceptance and real organizational improvement.
3) The third requirement for a successful performance-based pay system is money—
the system has to be funded adequately. For the first couple of years, there may not be
much money to fund raises of any significance and, to the extent the City ties
performance to individual pay changes, it's likely to be in the form of one-time
exceptional performance awards.
To put this in perspective, the City's long-range financial planning group is reviewing
a challenging immediate future. Under the most positive assumptions,the City will have
to deal with a shortfall that grows to over$2.2 million by 2017. Under worse
assumptions,the gap is over$8 million. Managing that financial challenge will require a
very specific strategic plan.
How do you fund performance-based pay in this climate? Answer: You link
performance measurement to the City's very detailed strategic objectives and find the
efficiencies necessary to close the gap,trying to create resources to reward employees,
albeit modestly, for helping the City to close the gap. The new pay plans will help. We
project salary savings alone of over$1 million when fully implemented. Clearly much
more will be needed, beginning fairly immediately. However, fiscal dedication from the
Council supporting performance based pay will be required.
In the mid 1990's,we had a client facing a significant financial challenge. That client
created and implemented a detailed strategic plan that trimmed city services to a
focused core, out-sourced wherever it made sense, set aside sufficient funds off the top
to finance infrastructure requirements, and reduced staffing through attrition. We
assisted by simplifying the compensation plan and emphasizing performance
management. In fact, employees did not receive pay increases until the City was re-
positioned and moving forward again.
Each client's circumstances are unique, and the City of Oshkosh is engaged in
determining its future financial course. We do feel however, that the steps our former
client needed to take to balance its budget and protect infrastructure are informative
and likely to be repeated in many municipalities across the country.
10
We want to emphasize here that the City Council did not give us policy direction in
late 2011, nor did we develop our pay plan recommendations, knowing the extent of a
projected shortfall. We knew that the City was balancing its 2012 budget using a
combination of higher employee benefits contributions and a pay freeze. The policy
objective continues to be to preserve public services. Because public services depend
on quality public employees,this has to a key emphasis.
Our expectation is that any raises near term will be conditioned on significant cost-
savings, not revenue increases. Our recommendation is that this is the perfect
opportunity to implement performance management—the City may never need it more
than it needs it now.
11
CITY OF OSHKOSH
PAY PLAN BENCHMARKS
JOB TITLE JOB EVAL SCORE MARKET ESTIMATE
CASHIER 306 $13.50
SECRETARY 317 $13.50
CUSTODIAN 342 $13.50
GROUNDSKEEPER 342 $15.00
BILLING CLERK 351 $14.75
WELDER 399 $17.50
BLDG MAINT MECH 399 $17.75
ACCOUNT CLERK II 401 $16.00
PC TECH 406 $21.50
ADMIN ASST 435 $22.00
ENGINEERING TECH 437 $22.75
EQUIP OPERATOR III 442 $22.25
MECHANIC 442 $18.50
ELECTRICIAN 474 $25.00
PROPERTY APPRAISER II 512 $26.50
LIBRARIAN 534 $26.50
PAYROLL COORDINATOR 545 $25.50
ARCHIVIST 612 $27.00
PRINCIPAL PLANNER 658 $29.00
MANAGING LIBRARIAN 672 $28.25
ACCOUNTING SUPERV 684 $30.75
WTR FILT PNT SUPT 713 $35.00
WW TREAT PLNT SUPT 715 $35.75
CITY CLERK 724 $33.75
ASST FINANCE DIR 734 $39.25
CIVIL ENGINEER II 737 $33.50
CHIEF BUILDING OFFIC 744 $33.00
CITY ASSESSOR 756 $40.00
Copyrighted Carlson Consulting LLC
February 2012 Attachment 1 .1 2/9/12
CITY OF OSHKOSH
PAY PLAN BENCHMARKS
JOB TITLE JOB EVAL SCORE MARKET ESTIMATE
DIRECTOR OF IT 780 $40.75
ASST CITY ATTORNEY 808 $36.25
POLICE CAPTAIN 811 $38.75
STREET SUPERINTENDENT 814 $39.25
ASST DIR PUB WKS 897 $45.25
DIRECTOR OF PARKS 929 $41.00
DIR COMMUNITY DEVEL 1002 $46.00
LIBRARY DIRECTOR 1015 $42.00
FIRE CHIEF 1018 $49.25
POLICE CHIEF 1018 $50.50
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE 1089 $51.00
CITY ATTORNEY 1104 $49.00
DIR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1144 $53.50
NOTE: Market estimates for these benchmarks are Carlson Consulting LLC work
product based on professional evaluation and judgments made by our consultants
from appropriate sources. Job evaluation scores are determined by application
of our proprietary Point Factor Job Evaluation System to documentation provided
by the City of Oshkosh and its employees.
Copyrighted Carlson Consulting LLC
February 2012 Attachment 1 .2 2/9/1 2
CITY OF OSHKOSH
STAFF PAY PLAN
87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 120.0%
GRADE MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONT PT MAX
M 48.38 49.76 51.15 52.53 53.91 $55.29 $66.35
Assistant City Manager/Director of Administrative Services
Director of Public Works
L $43.97 $45.23 $46.49 $47.74 $49.00 $50.25 60.31
City Attorney
Director of Finance
K $39.97 $41.11 $42.25 $43.39 $44.53 $45.67 $54.81
Director of Community Development
Fire Chief
Police Chief
J $36.32 $37.36 $38.40 $39.44 $40.47 $41.51 $49.81
Assistant Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Director of Parks
Director of Transportation
Public Works Utility Bureau Manager
I $33.01 $33.95 $34.90 $35.84 $36.78 $37.73 $45.27
Assistant City Attorney
Assistant Fire Chief
Director of Museum
Director of Senior Services
Human Resources Bureau Manager
Information Technology Bureau Manager
Planning Services Division Manager
Police Captain
Public Works Field Operations Bureau Manager
ATTACHMENT 2.1
CITY OF OSHKOSH
STAFF PAY PLAN
87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 120.0%
GRADE MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONT PT MAX
H $30.00 $30.86 $31.71 $32.57 $33.43 $34.29 $41.14
Assistant Finance Director
Chief Building Official
City Assessor
City Clerk
Civil Engineering Supervisor
Economic Development Expeditor
General Services Bureau Manager
Wastewater Treatment Plant Division Manager
Water Distribution Division Manager
Water Filtration Plant Division Manager
G $27.26 $28.04 $28.82 $29.60 $30.38 $31.16 $37.39
Civil Engineer Senior
Deputy City Assessor
Electrical Traffic Division Manager
Financial Accounting Division Manager
Financial Utility Division Manager
Golf Course Division Manager
Landscape Operations Division Manager
Parks Operations Division Manager
Parks Revenue& Facilities Division Manager
Principal Planner-Housing&Neighborhoods Coordinator
Principal Planner-Land Use/CDBG Coordinator
Public Works Mechanic Division Manager
Public Works Street Supervisor
Transportation Mechanic& Maintenance Division Manager
ATTACHMENT 2.2
CITY OF OSHKOSH
STAFF PAY PLAN
87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 120.0%
GRADE MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONT PT MAX
F $24.78 $25.48 $26.19 $26.90 $27.61 $28.32 $33.98
Archivist
Assistant Director Of Museum
Assistant Water Distribution Division Manager
Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator
Chemist
Community Media Services Coordinator
Curator
Environmental Health Specialist
GIS Administrator
Media Services Operations Specialist
Office Administration Division Manager
Program Coordinator
Public Health Nurse
Registrar
Safety& Risk Management Coordinator
Wastewater Maintenance Supervisor
Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor
E $22.51 $23.16 $23.80 $24.44 $25.09 $25.73 $30.88
Associate Planner/GIS Specialist
Benefits&Wellness Coordinator
Building Systems Inspector
Civil Engineer
Community Program Coordinator
Crime Analyst
Database Administrator
Golf Professional &Clubhouse Supervisor
Graphic Artist
Industrial/Electrical Technician
Lead Civil Engineer Technician
Maintenance Coordinator
Marketing& Membership Coordinator
Payroll&Training Coordinator
Programmer/Analyst
Public Works Sanitation Division Manager
Sanitarian
Transit Coordinator
Transit Operations Supervisor
ATTACHMENT 2.3
CITY OF OSHKOSH
STAFF PAY PLAN
87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 120.0%
GRADE MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP S CONT PT MAX
D $20.46 $21.04 $21.63 $22.21 $22.80 $23.38 $28.06
Administrative Assistant
Civil Engineer Technician
Deputy City Clerk
Electrical Mechanical Technician
Electrician
Engineering Specialist
Equipment Mechanic
Executive Assistant
Exhibit Technician
Housing Inspector
Housing Specialist
Instrumentation Technician
Lead Arborist
Lead Cashier
Lead Cemetery Worker
Lead Construction Worker
Lead Equipment Operator
Lead Parks Maintenance Worker
Lead Vehicle Mechanic
Lead Water Equipment Operator
Lead Water Maintenance Worker
Maintenance Mechanic
Management Assistant
Plant Electrician
Plumbing Inspector/Pretreatment Coordinator
Property Appraiser
Senior Buyer
Telecommunications Specialist
Vehicle Mechanic
ATTACHMENT 2.4
CITY OF OSHKOSH
STAFF PAY PLAN
87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 120.0%
GRADE MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONT PT MAX
C $16.18 $16.64 $17.11 $17.57 $18.03 $18.49 $22.19
Account Clerk II
Arborist
Building Maintenance Custodian
City Sealer
Clerk Dispatcher
Court Liaison Clerk
Equipment Operator
Horticulturist
Lead Sanitation Operator
Office Assistant
Parks Maintenance Worker
Parks Trades Technician
PC Hardware Technician
Production Specialist
Property Evidence Clerk
Traffic Painter
Utility Operator
Wastewater Treatment Liquids Operator
Wastewater Treatment Solids Operator
Water Filtration Operator
Water Maintenance Worker
Water Meter Service Worker
Welder
ATTACHMENT 2.5
CITY OF OSHKOSH
STAFF PAY PLAN
87.5% 90.0% 92.5% 95.0% 97.5% 100.0% 120.0%
GRADE MIN STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 CONT PT MAX
B $13.47 $13.85 $14.24 $14.62 $15.01 $15.39 $18.47
Account Clerk I
Cashier
Computer Operator
Groundskeeper
Parking Control Officer
Receptionist
Records Clerk
Sanitation Operator
Secretary
Shop Maintenance Worker
Technology Support Services Coordinator
Telecommunications Clerk
Wastewater Treatment Maintenance Worker
Word Processing Operator
Zoo Specialist
A $10.59 $10.89 $11.19 $11.50 $11.80 $12.10 $14.52
Vacant
ATTACHMENT 2.6