 |
Human Resources Board of Chilmark
October 8, 2015 APPROVED MINUTES
Present: Jim Malkin, Chair, Jennie Greene, Steven Flanders, Stephen Lewenberg, Bill Rossi, Board of Selectmen Representative, Chuck Hodgkinson, HRBC Staff Representative
Not present: Max McCreery
Public/ Board or Comm. Members: Sandy Stapcyznski, HRS, Inc.
Staff: Jennifer Christy, Admin. Asst., Tim Carroll, Exec. Sec., Ellen Biskis, Town Accountant, Diana DeBlase, Receptionist & Asst. to the Exec. Sec., Pam Bunker, Asst. Assessor, Rodney Bunker, Maintenance Supervisor of Town Buildings, Melanie Becker, Town Treasurer
Meeting called to order at 8:00AM
- The September 25, 2015 Minutes were reviewed.
- Ms. Greene made a motion to approve as written. The motion was seconded. 3 ayes. 1 abstention.
- Review of HRS, Inc Compensation Draft Reports with Ms. Stapcyznski:
- Mr. Malkin reviewed the task before the Board and noted that, although there will not be time to review the information and provide a recommendation for the planned Special Town Meeting on November 9, 2015, the Board still has time to present a recommendation to the BOS for the ATM 2016.
- Mr. Malkin directed the minutes show that there were a number of questions submitted concerning the job description audit when it was reviewed at the Sept. 25th meeting. Mr. Malkin noted that the positions that HRS, Inc. commented on are to be reviewed by the supervisors/ department heads and the positions revised, if needed. After that, the department heads may submit the revised position descriptions to the HRB as part of the normal process. Mr. Malkin noted the key task for the HRB is to make a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen regarding the compensation study. Mr. Malkin suggested the recommendation to the BOS be submitted before the Finance Committee meeting in January. He further suggested that there are two key areas the HRB must look at: to what extent are jobs comparable and where does
the Town of Chilmark stand in comparison to other island towns. Ms. Stapcyznski confirmed that the data is FY2015 data and the reference to the data usefulness for 1-4 years indicates the standard time during which an organization may consider the compensation study to be valid.
- Mr. Lewenberg inquired of Ms. Stapcyznski whether it could be known whether all the jobs as a whole in the town compare to the group of other jobs analyzed. The question was where the jobs, as a whole, are on average: on the higher scale of pay, middle scale or lower scale? Mr. Lewenberg asked this question to establish a starting point for the discussion.
- Mr. Flanders clarified Mr. Lewenberg’s question to say he is asking where does the Town stand, as a whole, in comparison to other island towns, as a whole? Mr. Lewenberg shortened his question to ask Ms. Stapcyznski whether she had a “feel” for where Chilmark landed on a range of compensation.
- Ms. Stapcyznski stated 30 positions were in the analysis (even though only 23 were included in the study in the beginning) and noted 7 positions appear to be in the lower range of compensation. She stated that in general the Town compensation is comparable to the market, but that the analysis and comparison needs to be performed by position since there are differences between the positions. Ms. Stapcyznski stated in general the Town is comparable in compensation to other towns but there are certain positions that need updated descriptions and will therefore possibly alter compensation in the future.
- Mr. Malkin restated Mr. Lewenberg’s question: if the positions were to be analyzed at an hourly basis and compared with the “market”(the other island towns), how would Chilmark compare? Ms. Stapcyznski stated on the whole that the Town is within the acceptable range (10% above or below the average.) She stated that there are 5 or 6 positions that are below the 10% range. Ms. Stapcyznski also stated there was one position that was very low, approximately 20% below the market rate. Ms. Stapcyznski said that HRS, Inc. did not look at the aggregate and did the analysis focusing on individual positions.
- Ms. Stapcyznski noted the data is all FY15 data. She clarified that the answer in #2 of the List of Questions issued to Ms. Stapcyznski after the Sept. 25th meeting means that the FY15 data will be useful for a couple years.
- Mr. Malkin inquired what the source of the data is in the report. Ms. Stapcyznski noted HRS, Inc. performed their own survey to provide the numbers in the data report and noted that the information sent by Ms. Christy on October 7, 2015 was helpful and some of the information was used by HRS, Inc.
- Ms. Stapcyznski stated that she has the source documents for all the Town studies HRS, Inc. performed and will make that available to the Board if needed.
- Mr. Hodgkinson inquired what the sources were for the median. Martha’s Vineyard towns and Nantucket was the answer. Ms. Stapcyznski also stated the ERI data is included, but not averaged into the island numbers.
- Mr. Lewenberg inquired whether Nantucket tends to be higher than Martha’s Vineyard in their compensation due to a possibly higher cost of living. Mr. Lewenberg stated his thought that the Nantucket compensation rates are significantly higher than MV even though he does not have data to support his idea. Ms. Stapcyznski stated compensation on Nantucket is not always higher than the island.
- Mr. Malkin stated the Board felt the ERI data was interesting, perhaps, but not information that the Board needed for the purpose of the study.
- Mr. Malkin stated what was needed is how Chilmark compares to all the other towns on the island, as a whole. He further stated the Board would like the study to exclude Nantucket.
- Mr. Hodgkinson inquired whether the study could include the hours worked within a year and the compensation of those positions. Ms. Stapcyznski stated this would be an additional large piece of work and wondered whether this was an element of the original agreement.
- Mr. Malkin stated that the Board needs to make a thorough and reliable recommendation to the Board of Selectmen and feels the new information of hours for each position may be needed to make a reliable recommendation.
- Mr. Hodgkinson inquired again what the specific data sources were. Ms. Stapcyznski noted salary schedules, questionnaires, budget documents, interviews, human resource data from HRS, Inc. as sources. Ms. Stapcyznski noted her full confidence in the data and confirmed that the data gathered last year by the HRB was used in the report.
- Ms. Greene inquired re Page 1 of row 11 of the compensation data study, Tax Collector. Ms. Stapcyznski noted that many towns have a combined Tax Collector/Treasurer position or a Town Clerk/Tax Collector position. Mr. Hodgkinson asked if it could be shown which towns have combined positions and what the compensation is for those positions.
- Ms. Greene inquired about the usefulness of the ERI data and why it was included. Mr. Malkin stated Ms. Stapcyznski previously stated that it may be useful information for the Town.
- Ms. DeBlase suggested HRS, Inc. fill in all data in the study particularly for those positions that show a greater difference from the median before more progress is made on the analysis of the information.
- Ms. Stapcyznski stated some positions do not have comparable positions or Towns did not provide information in order for her to fill in data.
- Mr. Malkin requested that Ms. Stapcyznski please obtain missing data and if the data cannot be gathered to please note that the data is not obtainable. Mr. Malkin also noted that the report should make clear whether HRS, Inc. feels the positions are not comparable as well.
- Ms. DeBlase stated the report should really make clear that the information in the data report is FY15.
- Mr. Hodgkinson requested that the report should also indicate clearly if there is no comparable job to compare it to. Mr. Malkin stated the report should say three different things: whether the positions are comparable, whether there were no positions to compare the position to and whether the Towns provided the data at all.
- Ms. Bunker inquired whether the Asst. Assessor position is comparable to other Towns. Ms. Stapcyznski stated she specifically asked the other towns for the department head, the “#1” person, in the Assessor department; the official and not the elected position. The Board and Ms. Stapcyznski looked at the study data for Asst. Assessor and agreed to look at the data to confirm it is correct for the head of the department.
- Ms. DeBlase inquired re the upcoming schedule.
- Mr. Hodgkinson asked if the data chart could show which information was gathered by HRS, Inc. and which information was provided by the Board’s administrative assistant. Ms. Stapcyznski stated this would not be easily done.
- Ms. Greene inquired about the position of the TriTown Ambulance Deputy Chief position. Mr. Carroll noted he had trouble finding data to fulfill that request.
- Mr. Malkin inquired of the schedule/calendar that would be workable from Mr. Carroll. Mr. Carroll stated the budget worksheets are distributed on November 18th. Mr. Carroll noted that it would be helpful to have compensation rates for the Accountant before the 18th of November.
- Mr. Hodgkinson stated the departments need to be contacted to alert them to work on their position re-grading if necessary in the beginning of November. Mr. Malkin noted performance evaluation reminders should also go out to the Boards/ Committees.
- Mr. Hodgkinson agreed to work with Ms. Christy to communicate with the departments that appear to need to work on position description revision and position re-grading.
- Ms. Stapcyznski agreed to provide new information by October 19th.
- Mr. Malkin scheduled a meeting of the Board at 8AM on October 20, 2015.
- Mr. Hodgkinson asked if he may communicate to the Boards/Committees regarding needed position description revision and regrading to please try to provide new descriptions for regrading by October 19th.
- Ms. Stapcyznski agreed to provide the answers to all the questions sent to her previously by October 19th.
Meeting adjourned at 8:53AM
| |
