County officials are at an impasse over a job classification and compensation study.
The Johnson County Commissioners on Monday put off a decision on a professional services agreement with Waggoner Irwin Scheele & Associates, Inc. to provide the 2025 Job Classification and Compensation Analysis. Although the council approved the vendor for the study in February and approved the contract in August, two commissioners have questions that still need to be resolved, they said.
The agreement price for the study was not to exceed $58,640 plus expense reimbursement. The start date was slated for Dec. 1 and would have been completed in six to eight months.
Consultants would review existing pay schedules and gather relevant organizational information like pay policies and procedures, according to the agreement. They would use existing county job descriptions, as confirmed accurate by county officials, to review classification levels, internal job ranking and external market pay survey comparisons.
The process involves conducting in-person or remote interviews with elected officials and department heads to get information on organizational structure and employee job responsibilities, the agreement shows.
Commissioner Ron West said job classifications and compensation analysis is available through the Association of Indiana Counties and the county doesn’t consider private industry comparisons because government employees have different duties than their private sector counterparts. Doing the study would be a “waste of $58,000,” he said.
“To spend $58,000 for something that, in my estimation, is somewhat readily available. Secondly, I don’t think it [the study] would be used by the council,” West said. “They might make some suggestions, but then it goes back to the elected official or department heads to make that determination of salaries.”
West said there were simple solutions to handling the county’s compensation and he believes the council needs to look at those solutions for individuals in each department.
For example, West said when he was on the council, he had suggested making an annual salary percentage increase and “hold the line on that” so every elected official is bound to that percentage. He offered the idea to allow the elected official or department head to take 4% of the money allocated for employee pay and redistribute it among their employees at their discretion.
“I don’t know what purpose it’s (the study) going to serve. They’re going to get this, it’s going to be $58,000 and it’s not really going to be beneficial to them,” West said. “I’ve spent 12 years on the council and I can speak with a certain amount of experience in regard to salaries and salary adjustments in government.”
Commissioner Kevin Walls was in favor of the agreement, which would be paid for by the council’s budget. He said he sees the commissioners’ role as more “facilitating the opportunity for them to research” employee compensation. The council and department heads have been discussing the salary study for months and have had in-depth talks with the vendor, he said.
The council has brought up employee pay at most meetings this year and the salary study was their solution to help ensure county employees are paid fairly based on their job duties. The council has also put off decisions on employee pay and reclassifying certain jobs until after the study was prepared.
However, on Monday Commissioner Brian Baird, the board chairman, let Walls’ motion to approve the contract fail for lack of a second.
“This has become a fairly contentious issue in the last couple of years in the county, and I think until we come to some kind of conclusion of agreement that it’s going to continue to be a contentious issue, not only for us, the council, but also for the employees …,” Baird said. “I think we need to have some further discussion on this issue to see if we can’t get it to a point where it’s less contentious and a little more agreeable to the palates of all those involved.”
The Daily Journal reached out to Baird for more information on the future of the study. Tiffany Costley, the assistant county attorney, sent a statement via email from the commissioners.
“We are in discussion of this issue to resolve any conflict with the council of which we all work very well together in moving Johnson County forward and will continue to do so,” the statement says. “The commissioners have questions for the council on this issue and would like more time to review and discuss but must be aware and respectful of all open-door regulations. We will continue to do our best to keep Johnson County moving in a positive, effective and efficient manner by working together as we always have.”
Pam Burton, county council president, told the Daily Journal she plans to reach out to the commissioners to discuss the study.
The discussion is shelved for now, but will likely come back later.
