Loading...
5.3 ERMUSR 10-10-2023UTILITIES COMMISSION MEETING TO:FROM: ERMU CommissionMark Hanson - General Manager MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: October 10, 2023 5.3 SUBJECT: Wage & Benefits Committee Update ACTION REQUESTED: Provide direction on future action requests related to 2024 Wages & Benefits; 2023/24 market analysis/compensation study; and Wage & Benefits Committee organizational changes DISCUSSION: A Wage & Benefits Committee (WBC) meeting was held on Monday, October 2, 2023, to review employee requests from the August 18 meeting. Staff presented the following requests (attached): a wage adjustment of the lineworker metro average plus $1.00 for all employees; tiered updates to the bereavement leave policy, with the broadest category increasing to five days; changes to nightwork and rest time policy; and a suggestion to review the vacation schedule for possible changes to make ERMU more attractive to new(er) employees. General Manager Mark Hanson added two additional items to the agenda for discussion: 1) review of a proposed market analysis/compensation study for all staff; and 2) review of possible changes to the annual wage and benefits evaluation process. This report is intended to recap the discussions associated with the full agenda of the October 2 WBC meeting. A separate report will be presented for approval in agenda item 5.4, Wage & Benefits Committee Proposed 2024 Adjustments. The approval request is provided separately for clarity and so commission members could hear the full WBC update before voting on the proposed adjustments. Staff Requests: ERMU’s HR Generalist Megan Zachman gathered data from the electric utilities that make up the metro average for lineworker pay. The metro average encompasses the seven utilities of Anoka, Chaska, Great River Energy, North St. Paul, Shakopee, Wright Hennepin Electric, and Connexus. These utilities are most comparable to, and competitive with, ERMU for lineworker pay and accountability. Ms. Zachman also presented data collected in response to additional requests of committee members (attached). For the first request on wage increases, the metro average is currently estimated at 3.15% with five of seven utilities reporting their proposed 2024 wage increases. The committee discussed the merits of a specific dollar amount versus a percentage above the metro average. Rather ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 68 than work with a fluctuating metro average, the committee proposes a straight 4.0% wage adjustment for 2024, regardless of the final metro average. For the second requestregarding bereavement leave, Ms. Zachman sharedthe trend in both public and private employers is to broaden the bereavement leave to be as inclusive as possible. The committee supported the more inclusive verbiage but felt the current three days wereappropriate given proposed changes to the vacation accrual schedule (summarized below). The committee also supported adding a tier for uncles, aunts, and cousins for one day. The third request was for changes to the nightwork and rest time policy. The first proposal was to provide a two-hour minimum rest time for nightwork (10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) completed. The committee supported this change as proposed. The second proposal was to provide eight hours of rest time for employees working four or more hours of nightwork. The committee supports providing eight hours of rest time for employees working four or more hours of nightwork but only for work completed from 12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. (instead of 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). The fourth request was to review our vacation accrual schedule. Ms. Zachman shared it has become increasingly more common for public employers to provide three or more weeks of vacation for new employees. After discussing possible options, the committee determined adjusting the accrual schedule to provide three weeks of vacation for new hires was appropriate. Committee members determined adjustments should be focused on the lower tenured employees. The proposed schedule below adjusts the accrual rates for employees with 0-12 years of tenure(shown in light grey): 2023 Proposed 2024 0-4 yrs. 12 days0-4 yrs. 15 days 5 yrs. 13 days5-9 yrs. 16 days 6-9 yrs. 15 days10-11 yrs. 17 days 10 yrs. 16 days12-13 yrs. 19 days 11 yrs. 17 days14-15 yrs. 20 days 12 yrs. 18 days16-18 yrs. 22 days 13 yrs. 19 days19 yrs. 25 days 14-15 yrs.20 days20-21 yrs. 26 days 16-18 yrs.22 days22-23 yrs. 27 days 19 yrs. 25 days24+ yrs. 28 days 20-21 yrs. 26 days 22-23 yrs.27 days 24+ yrs. 28 days No action is requested in conjunction with this update. Approval of proposed 2024 wage and benefit adjustments is requested in the staff report for agenda item 5.4, Wage & Benefits Committee Proposed 2024 Adjustments. Market Analysis/Compensation Study: ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 69 General Manager Mark Hanson presented his concerns regarding employee wages and how feedback from the employee engagement surveyandstay interviews, as well asobservations duringrecent hiring efforts inspired him to conduct a compensation study. Mr. Hanson requested 2023 compensation data from his peers at Anoka, Chaska,and Shakopee. The three cities were selected as comparable utilities due to their use of our power provider (MMPA); being the same type of utility (electric and water); and having similar commuting distances to Minneapolis (25-31 miles). All position categories across the company were reviewed against comparable wage data from the other utilities. The average wage for each position was determined and compared against our current wage. Results ranged from minor adjustments needed (0-3%), to moderate adjustments (4-8%), to significant adjustments (9-18%). The results showed no positions were overpaid. Most adjustments would only require updates to the current pay range for the respective position. Some results indicated specific positions should be reclassified to a higher wage level. Additionally, some positions should be reviewed for reclassifying as exempt positions. The presentation of the compensation study is to be considered informational only – no approvals are being requested at this time. The spreadsheet comprising the study is very complex, so it is not attached to this report. Rather, the commission will be walked through the information step by step so everyone can follow along and ask clarifying questions together. Staff is seeking commission direction on future action steps. Possible direction could range from modifying the existing study to account for any identified gaps, contract with a consultant to perform a similar study, or do nothing at this time. Review of the Annual Wage and Benefits Evaluation Process: Lastly, the committee discussed options for possible changes to the annual wage and benefits review process. As this year’s discussions may be more impactful to the budget, some members felt future wage and benefit discussions should be brought directly to the full commission so requests and ensuing discussions could be heard firsthand instead of just a synopsis. Staff is seeking commission direction on future action steps. Possible changes could include: 1) Staff representatives presenting requests to management, then management presenting recommendations to the commission. 2) Staff representatives presenting directly to the commission during a separate wage and benefits special meeting. 3) Staff representatives presenting directly to the commission during a regular commission meeting. ATTACHMENTS: WBC Staff Requests Document; August 18, 2023 WBC Human Resources Document; October 2, 2023 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 70 71 72 73 Wage and Benefits Committee Meeting October 2, 2023 The following document details information compiled by human resources as requested at the August 2023 Wage and Benefits Committee (WBC) Meeting. 1. Change in 2024 for annual increase methodology. To counter increased inflation in recent years, employees requested a change in methodology for the 2024 wage adjustment. Their ask is to base adjustments on the metro average (assumed 3.0% at this time) plus $1.00 for all employees. 1a. Consumer Price Index (CPI) and ERMU annual wage adjustments. Consumer Price Index July 2021July 2022 July 2023 National 5.4%8.5% 3.2% Minneapolis-St. Paul area 6.5%8.2% 1.0% Employee Group Jan 2022 Jan 2023 Jan 2024 Lineworkers3.2%3.4% TBD Non-Lineworkers 3.0%3.4% TBD 1b. Wage adjustment using employee proposed amounts (amounts below include two ERMU employees currently earning training wages). Adjustment Amount Low Adjustment High Adjustment $0.50 0.54%2.51% Metro Ave (3.0%) + $0.50 3.54%5.51% $1.00 1.07%4.90% Metro Ave (3.0%) + 1.004.07%7.90% 1c. Wage adjustments using proposed amounts (amounts below do not include the two ERMU employees earning training wages). Adjustment Amount Low Adjustment High Adjustment $0.50 0.54%1.12% Metro Ave (3.0%) + $0.50 3.54%4.12% $1.00 1.07%2.21% Metro Ave (3.0%) + 1.004.07%5.21% 1d. Gross (annual) employee regular wages with proposed wage adjustments. Adjustment Amount Gross Wages Metro Average (assumed 3.0%)$4.47 million Metro Average + $0.50 $4.52 million Metro Average + $1.00 $4.56 million 1 74 2. Updated Bereavement leave policy. Employees requested an increase in the amount of bereavement leave as well as an expanded list of relationships for which it can be used. 2a. Draft, three-tier paid bereavement leave employee proposal. CategoryRelationship Days Immediate Spouse, domestic partner, child (including stepchild, foster-5 Family child, or other child for whom the employee serves as primary guardian), parent (including stepparent, foster-parent or other individual who served the role of an employee’s parental figure), grandparent (including step-grandparent), and grandchild (including step-grandchild) Close Family In-laws (parent, grandparent, and sibling), nieces, and nephews 3 Other Family Aunts, uncles, cousins 1 2b. Three-year lookback of ERMU employee bereavement leave use. Year EmployeesHours UsedAmount Paid 2020 5 72 $2,840.24 2021 9 113.50 $4,503.62 2022 3 48$1,840.64 3. Changes to Nightwork and Rest Time policy. Currently, the ERMU nightwork and rest time policy states a regular field worker will be provided with one hour paid rest time for each hour worked between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. (nightwork). Employees requested the following changes to the policy: A regular field worker shall be provided with a minimum of two hours of paid rest time for each occurrence they are asked to report for nightwork. This aligns with the pay provision in the ERMU call out time policy which states regular field workers who are asked to report for work outside their regular working hours shall be paid a minimum of two hours each time they report for work. A regular field worker asked to work four or more hours nightwork hours will receive following day off for paid rest time. 3a. Three years look back of additional rest time that would have been provided if a two-hour minimum paid rest time provision was in place. Year Hours 202021.40 202115.50 202231.50 3b. Three-year lookback of employees (per year) called out during nightwork hours in an amount of four (or more) hours and who would have received the following day of for paid rest time if the requested changes to the ERMU nightwork and rest time policy were in place. Year Employees 20202 20216 20224 2 75 4. Vacation schedule review. Employees requested that the ERMU vacation schedule be reviewed/evaluated for a possible increase in the amount of vacation new(er) employees accrue. 20212022Draft 2024Draft 2024 Hybrid 0-3 yrs.10 days 0-4 yrs. 12 days 0-4 yrs. 15 days 0-4 yrs. 13 days 4 yrs.12 days 5 yrs. 13 days 5-9 yrs. 17 days 5-8 yrs. 15 days 5 yrs.13 days 6-9 yrs. 15 days 10-11 yrs. 18 days 9-10 yrs. 16 days 6-9 yrs.15 days 10 yrs. 16 days 12-13 yrs. 19 days 11 yrs.17 days 10 yrs. 16 days 11 yrs. 17 days 14-15 yrs. 20 days 12 yrs.18 days 11 yrs. 17 days 12 yrs. 18 days 16-18 yrs. 22 days 13 yrs.19 days 12 yrs. 18 days 13 yrs. 19 days 19 yrs.25 days 14-15 yrs. 20 days 13 yrs. 19 days 14-15 yrs. 20 days 20-21 yrs. 26 days 16-18 yrs. 22 days 14-15 yrs. 20 days 16-18 yrs. 22 days 22-23 yrs. 27 days 19 yrs.25 days 16-18 yrs. 22 days 19 yrs. 25 days 24+ yrs. 28 days 20-21 yrs. 26 days 19+ yrs.25 days 20-21 yrs. 26 days 22-23 yrs. 27 days 22-23 yrs. 27 days 24+ yrs.28 days 24+ yrs.28 days Notes: In both options below, the objective is to increase the allowable time off for new hires (vacation + personal days) to 15 days. The Draft 2024 vacation schedule increases accrued vacation for years of service 0-12. This adds 93 additional paid vacation days for employees and is one example of how to redistribute accrued vacation to provide employees with more vacation earlier in their tenure. The benefits associated with adjusting the vacation accrual schedule include: o Achieves the objective of providing 15 days of vacation to new hires with no increase in total time off for employees with more than 12 years of service with ERMU. o Provides additional vacation days for lower tenure employees (12 years and below). The Draft 2024 Hybrid approach limits the impact of additional vacation days but adds a personal day to all levels. The benefits associated with adding a personal day include: o Personal days are allocated the first of the year for maximum flexibility. o Personal days can’t be carried over so allowable banked time does not increase (which reduces the financial liability associated with higher banked vacation amounts). o Adding a personal day would be a benefit received by all staff equally. o The added personal day could negate the need to make other time-off related adjustments. 3 76 10/2/2023 2023 Compensation Study 2 Agenda 1. Why do we need a comp study?2. What were the rules of engagement?3. Who are the comparable utilities?4. What were the outcomes?5. Possible Next Steps6. Questions/Direction 3 Why do a comp study? 2021 Stay Interviews2022 Engagement Survey2023 SWOT AnalysisCompensation studies are more specialized then targeted COLA adjustmentsConcern some positions have been left behind 2021 Wage & Benefits Committee RequestConsistent Request from EmployeesObservations during recent hiring effortsaƚƭƷ ƩĻĭĻƓƷ ͻŅǒƌƌͼ ƭƷǒķǤ Ǟğƭ ķƚƓĻ źƓ ЋЉЉБΉВ 4 Rules of Engagement Wage RangePay Category (exempt/non-exempt)Responsibilities (senior/lead)Pay Level (bands/groups) Use current year (2023) ratesFocus is on position, NOTthe personAll positions would be evaluated100% data driven, based on topof pay range 5 $6.6M 44,50018,772 $60.4M 25 Miles Shakopee $4.6M 28,20010,739 Chaska $45.3M 27 Miles $2.3M Anoka 17,85012,489 $34.5M 25 Miles $3.5M 26,20012,789 $47.7M 31 Miles Elk River Meet the comparable utilities (if used for COLA, why not comp comparable?) Member of MMPA (same wholesale rates)Part of metro average determinationSame Type of Utility (electric and water providers)Similar commuting distances to Minneapolis 2023 PopulationElectric BudgetWater Budget MplsCommuteCustomers 6 What were the outcomes? Received extensive data from comparable utilitiesUsed union contracts and/or pay tables for each city2024: $133K2025: $105K2026: $96K !ƓƚƉğ ŭğƦƭ ǞĻƩĻ ͻƓƚƩƒğƌźǩĻķͼ ǒƭźƓŭ ƉƓƚǞƓ ğǝĻƩğŭĻƭ Metro average process has worked for lineworkersbut adjustments are needed for all other positionsConfidence in results is highEstimated Total Budget Impact: $334KResults fell behind Chaska/Shakopee but ahead of Anoka, which makes sense based on size/customers 7 Possible Next Steps If increase > 9%, divided evenly by 3If increase < 9%, up to 3% distribution/year80/85/90/95% of new Step 5 wage Plan for three-year implementationAmount per year determined by:Increases added to respective Step 5 wageSteps 1-4 evenly distributed Research identified gaps/increase accuracyRequest approval when Commission is ready 8 Questions/Direction $133K < 0.27% of expenses w/PP or < 0.79% w/o PP What gaps would you like filled?With this study? With a consultant study? Do you agree with the need for a comp study?Are you comfortable with the comparables?Are you comfortable with the data?Would you like to move forward?If moving forward, which year(s)?For perspective: