Legislature(2007 - 2008)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/13/2008 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB417 | |
| HB359 | |
| HB324 |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 194 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 324 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 417 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 359 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 364 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 417
An Act relating to the compensation for certain public
officials, officers, and employees not covered by
collective bargaining agreements; relating to pay
increments for longevity in state service; and
providing for an effective date.
KEVIN BROOKS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION, introduced HB 417 by section. The bill
addresses pay issues for non-covered state employees,
including employees in the executive, judicial and
legislative branches. The bill restates the salary schedule
to reflect a 5.5% retroactive increase and identifies
several positions that need adjustment.
· Sec. 1 adjusts pay for the members of the Limited Entry
Commission from range 26, step C to range 27 with no
step designation.
· Sec. 2 conforms HB 417 to the Alaska State Defense
Force statute.
· Sec. 3 adjusts pay for the chief procurement officer
position, which has been functioning in dual roles,
from range 24 to range 27, consistent with other
directors. Senate Bill 171 does the same.
· Sec. 4 removes a step designation for deputy
commissioners upon appointment.
· Sec. 5 restates the salary schedule effective July 1,
2007 to reflect a 5.5% increase.
· Sec. 6 provides language adjusting the schedule by 3%
for FY 09.
· Sec. 7 adjusts the schedule another 3% for FY 10.
· Sec. 8 creates pay increments computed at a rate of
3.75% for employees who have attained step F. A person
could be eligible for a merit increase every two years.
A subsection allows the same for legislative staff.
· Sec. 9 moves the Regulatory Commission of Alaska
commissioners from range 26C to 27 without steps.
· Sec. 10 repeals longevity steps and replaces them with
pay increments.
· Sec. 11 clarifies executive branch pay. Anyone
currently receiving a salary override, as well as
commissioners whose pay was adjusted three years ago,
would not receive the 5.5% or the 3%. There are
mechanisms in place that compensates those individuals
adequately; the intent is to close the gap.
· Sec. 12 provides for increments for the judicial
branch.
· Sec. 13 gives employees of the University salary
increases in accordance with the compensation policy of
the Board of Regents.
· Sec. 14 stipulates that the salary increments
identified earlier are prospective.
· Sec. 15 provides transition language so that no
individual is harmed by the bill, but credited for time
served.
· Sec. 17 makes the first 5.5% adjustment retroactive.
1:59:31 PM
Representative Gara referred to Sec. 5 and asked how many
steps were currently in place. Mr. Brooks answered A through
F. Representative Gara asked if the only additional step was
the 3.75% every two years. Mr. Brooks explained the current
longevity steps and said the bill removes limits on how far
a person can go. There was a discussion regarding details of
how the steps can be used to address recruitment difficulty.
Representative Gara did not think the longevity allowance
addressed the difficulty.
2:05:46 PM
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA
COURT SYSTEM, pointed out that the judicial branch has the
largest and lowest paid group of non-covered employees in
state government outside the University. Approximately 70%
of employees are range 15 or below. This means a high
turnover rate, which translates to high training costs and
other inefficiencies. In spite of this, the employees are
hardworking and committed. He noted that over the past three
years, court employees have received cost of living
adjustments (COLA) substantially lower than the actual rate
of inflation. He thought the change in longevity pay would
help the courts keep mid-level workers longer.
Mr. Christensen spoke to two provisions in the bill that the
court system is not in accord with. First, while the bill
gives COLA to magistrates and judges, it does not give them
the retroactive pay raise for the current fiscal year, nor
does it give magistrates longevity changes. The majority of
magistrates are underpaid compared to similar workers in the
executive branch. Second, he was concerned about grouping
judges together with political appointees in the executive
branch. Judges do not get longevity increases, unlike
regular state employees, who can get step increases equal to
around 35% of their salary over an 18-year career. A judge
working for 18 years earns as much as a new judge, making
judges uniquely dependent on COLA. In two decades, Alaskan
judges have gone from being the highest paid state court
judges in the country to next to last. It has become
difficult to retain judges and to recruit new ones. He
wanted the salaries to keep up with inflation (Statement on
File).
2:12:13 PM
Representative Crawford thought the same story could be told
across all state employment.
BRUCE LUDWIG, BUSINESS MANAGER, ALASKA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION (APEA/AFT), spoke for two groups within state
government, the state supervisors and the confidential
employees. The supervisory unit recently completed
negotiations, which he described. He referred to a handout
(On File) showing average state service. Supervisors are the
employees with the highest longevity.
Mr. Ludwig added that APEA/AFT would like to see the bill
amended so that it would not be effective for executive
branch employees until offered to classified employees as
well. The second handout (On File) shows who the bill
targets; APEA/AFT proposes amending it so that many more
people are affected.
2:18:00 PM
Representative Harris asked if the members of the groups Mr.
Ludwig listed were represented through union negotiations
and contracts. He asked if the people talked about in HB 417
had a bargaining unit. Mr. Ludwig answered that their
bargaining unit was the commissioner. He said the longevity
increases had been denied in bargaining because it was not
authorized. Representative Harris surmised that the only way
the people classified under HB 417 would get increases is
through statute.
2:20:03 PM
Co-Chair Chenault sought clarification regarding the
offering and denying of the longevity steps. He asked if
APEA/AFT had gone to arbitration and accepted the decision.
Mr. Ludwig replied that they bargained it with the State.
2:21:07 PM
FRED YATES, SELF, testified in favor of the bill. He thought
the people covered deserve what is being offered. He asked
for the longevity steps to be included as incentive to
retain people.
2:23:14 PM
ANNETTE KREITZER, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION, described the two tracks for state
employees: those represented by collective bargaining and
those who are not. The bill is for the later group.
Commissioner Kreitzer clarified some of Mr. Ludwig's
remarks. She said the entire offer had to be accepted, which
is what the union did. There are many components to a labor
contract; it's dangerous to separate one out. The State has
the same challenges as any other employer dealing with
recruitment and retention. The Department wants to be
equitable.
Representative Gara talked about the difference between
union and non-union employees. He understood that collective
bargaining governs union pay and the bill should govern non-
union pay. He stated that the place where the two groups are
the same relates to longevity, and thought it made sense for
everyone to have a two year increase after reaching the
final step.
Commissioner Kreitzer described her job as looking at the
full cost of each negotiated contract and judging whether
the cost was sustainable.
Representative Gara restated his concern regarding longevity
as a problem that applied to union as well as non-union
employees. He wanted the bill to address the problem for
both groups.
Commissioner Kreitzer maintained that she would not separate
out one piece of a contract. Representative Gara asked if
union employees had the same problem with getting stuck
after reaching the final step. Commissioner Kreitzer
acknowledged that they did.
2:30:35 PM
Commissioner Kreitzer commented that the union had accepted
the agreement. Representative Gara questioned whether the
employees meant to convey that they were satisfied with the
longevity situation. Commissioner Kreitzer reiterated that
she had to keep union and non-union issues separate.
Representative Kelly pointed out that union members pay dues
to get someone to bargain. He thought it would be a serious
mistake to legislate that process.
2:33:55 PM
Representative Hawker tried to find a broader perspective.
Although he thought non-union employees deserved the
recognition proposed in the bill, he understood the State
had to prioritize financially. He talked about important
human service workers who have endured pay freezes for many
years and wondered how Commissioner Kreitzer prioritized
giving a raise to the highest paid state employees.
2:37:17 PM
Commissioner Kreitzer disagreed that the people targeted in
the bill were the highest compensated employees. She
stressed that the bill is about non-covered employees. She
described the aging of the workforce and the pressures to
solve the retention and recruitment problems as soon as
possible. She suggested moving one step at a time. She
thought HB 417 was a reasonable step forward.
2:39:53 PM
Representative Hawker stated that he was not comfortable
with the legislation, given the resources available to the
State in relationship to the State's greatest needs.
Representative Kelly said he could support a bargaining/non-
bargaining wage freeze, but he could not support saving
money on just one group. He did not want the Legislature to
interfere with union activity.
2:43:23 PM
Representative Crawford asked about the 40-hour work week
and wondered if what was given up for that. Commissioner
Kreitzer responded that many state employees are already
working more than 40 hours. The service steps were the
inducement for the 40-hour work week. Her goal was to move
towards the 40-hour work week for non-union employees and
later for management, although it would be expensive.
2:47:06 PM
PUBLIC TESTIMONY CLOSED.
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1.
Page 5, line 3: Following "employees", Insert "and
magistrates"; Page 5, line 4: Following "than":, Delete
"magistrates and judicial officers", Insert "justices
and judges"; Page 5, line 11: Following "employees",
Insert "and magistrates"; Following "than":, Delete
"magistrates and judicial officers", Insert "justices
and judges"; Page 5, line 13: Following "courts":,
Insert "and"; Page 5, line 14: Following "courts":,
Delete ",and magistrates"; Page 5, line 16: Following
"AS 22.15.220":, Delete "(b) and".
Representative Hawker OBJECTED.
Mr. Christensen said the Amendment would allow the judicial
branch magistrates to get the retroactive pay and to
participate in the longevity step increases.
Co-Chair Chenault asked if the new fiscal note would be
adjusted to the Amendment. Mr. Christensen said the size of
the note would increase by $217,000.
2:49:16 PM
Representative Thomas asked for clarification regarding the
Amendment.
Representative Hawker WITHDREW his OBJECTION.
There being no further OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was ADOPTED.
Co-Chair Meyer referred to the changes needed in the fiscal
notes.
HB 417 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
2:51:33 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|