My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 1992 05 18
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1992
>
AG 1992 05 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 4:10:33 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 12:01:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
5/18/1992
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Pay Plan and Related Matters <br />May 11, 1992 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />I am recommending some changes in the Pay Plan in response to: <br /> <br />The preceding concerns. <br />The direction from the Commissioners to reduce the growth <br />in personnel salaries. <br />Your thoughts and direction on these matters. <br />The statement in Section 2 of the Pay Plan that "the Pay <br />Plan of Cabarrus County shall be administered in a fair <br />and systematic manner in accordance with work performed." <br /> <br />These recommendations include: <br /> <br />The use of Steps 1, Level 2 through Step 4, Level 1 of a <br />salary grade on the proposed pay scale for training <br />increases and/or negotiated employment amounts. <br />Full funding of training (development) increases, if <br />supported by written justification. <br />A. This is the only way we will remain marginally <br />competitive with the average market salaries <br />being paid for our job classes. County <br />salaries are an average of 12.7% above the <br />minimum salary grade levels. Current compara- <br />tive studies have many North Carolina counties <br />and cities with average salaries at 20+% above <br />the minimums. <br /> B. A significant part of the cost of our training <br /> increases are offset by the reduction in <br /> salaries from those of the prior occupants of <br /> the positions. In fact, there is a reinvest- <br /> ment effect with the savings from an employee <br /> that has left a position being used as an <br /> incentive for the new employee in that <br /> position. <br />Having merit increases become lump sum payments (once a <br />year) that would not be added to an employee's salary <br />base. To receive reoccurring pay for merit, it would <br />have to be earned year by year. Projections using lump <br />sum payments indicate potential savings of $2,275,511 <br />over five years, if funding merit monies at 1% of total <br />salaries. <br /> <br />To provide incentive for long-term quality performance it <br />is further proposed that when an employee earns merit pay <br />for three consecutive years, his or her salary base will <br />be increased by the percentage of the third year award. <br />This would be in lieu of a lump sum payment and can not <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.