5.2. ERMUSR 10-11-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Elk River =--~ Municipal Urilities 13069 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 430 Elk River, MN 5 5 3 30-043 0 UTILITIES COMMISSION MEETING P6NEREU B1 ~~l~'UR~ P ~ ,y c o c D T O S E R V E Phone: 763.441.2020 Fax: 763.441.5099 TO: FROM: Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission Troy Adams, P.E. -Utilities Director John Dietz -Chair Daryl Thompson -Vice Chair Al Nadeau -Trustee MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: October 11, 2011 5.2 SUBJECT: Review Wage Survey BACKGROUND: For the past 2 decades with the exception of 2009-2011, ERMU has used a survey of a predetermined seven neighboring utilities to gauge the industry for purposes of compensation comparison. For ease of comparing, the lineperson position has typically been used as the benchmark because job duties and position requirements aze fairly consistent from one utility to another. The utilities used in this survey had been agreed upon because of their proximity to ERMU. These are the utilities which ERMU is in direct labor competition with and their employees would generally experience similaz costs of living. This process of using the average benchmazked wages from the identified utilities also provided some mitigation to mazket labor cost volatility. In 2010 and 2011, Elk River Municipal Utilities utilized a new process in evaluating wage increases. This new process for annual wage increase proposals was handled over two separate commission meetings. During the first meeting, management provides industry comparisons, economic trends, and financial impact to the Utilities. Included was the metro average survey of seven predetermined peer utilities that had been used in the past. Also, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was provided. At the request of the commission, additional information has been provided for the second meeting including survey of benefits. The employees have been provided the opportunity to bring suggestions and requests to management. This information was reviewed and considered by management and then included in the presentation to the commission. At the discretion of the commission, employees were afforded the opportunity to address the commission during the first of the two meetings of this process. The topic would then be tabled until the following utility commission meeting at which the commission would make their decision.