03-21-1990 CC MIN - SPECIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes March 21, 1990 Page 5 tit employee for the City of Elk River. It was noted that employees using sick time when they are not sick are a significant cost to the employer in terms of lost work productivity and in terms of having overtime become necessary in order to fill in for the missed shift of work. In this regard, the City is a significant winner by having employees not abuse sick time and the cost of providing 10% of the unused sick time, up to a maximum of 120 days accumulated, is a small cost when considering the cost of employees abusing the sick time leave policy. Mayor Tralle and Councilmember Kropuenske indicated that they felt 12 days of sick time per year was more than what was needed. The City Administrator stated that this amount is the norm for cities and that, as this is the current amount offered, the City should not reduce this leave benefit. Councilmembers Schuldt and Holmgren questioned the need and benefit to the City for "rewarding" the employee who does not abuse the sick time policy. Ms. McCambridge further explained the amount and method of payment to the employees. The City Administrator listed a number of cities (from the MN Cities 1989 Salary Survey) that provide their employees with a much larger benefit than the 10% of 120 days proposed for Elk River. e It was the consensus of the City Council that the sick time policy as presented in the 3/14/90 memo from Shannon was acceptable with minor changes for clarification purposes. At this time the City Administrator requested approval of a motion that would direct the staff to prepare the ordinance in final form. COUNCILMEMBER DOBEL MOVED THAT THE PROPOSED PERSONNEL ORDINANCE AS REVIEWED AND CHANGED AT THE 1/29/90 AND THE 3/21/90 CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THAT STAFF IS DIRECTED TO PROCEED WITH PUTTING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AS REVIEWED INTO FINAL FORM FOR PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE. COUNCILMEMBER KROPUENSKE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-2. Councilmember Schuldt and Councilmember Holmgren opposed the motion. Councilmember Schuldt indicated that he was opposed to the motion as he felt it was an unnecessary procedural step. Councilmember Holmgren indicated that he was opposed to the motion because he is still in concept opposed to paying for good health (Item 3.5, Subd. C, v & vi - Sick Time Benefits). 5. Other Business There was no other business presented at this time. 6. City Administrator Update e The City Administrator advised the City Council that the School Board is considering eliminating the funding for one of the two jointly funded Juvenile Officers. The Administrator indicated that he would