On Tuesday, February 8, 2011, the Social Services Appropriations Subcommittee heard a presentation regarding pay-for-performance from Kristen Cox, DWS Executive Director. The Agency has been running a pilot program with their Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) and is looking to expand the pilot to the Eligibility Services.
The ALJ's started the pilot in 2009. Cox indicated that it has been very successful as they have been able to curb overtime pay and decrease the number of employees in the area. The pay-for-performance program has increased individual and team performance and has been cost neutral due to productivity enhancements.
The Department is rolling out the next phase of the pilot program to Eligibility Services this spring and are anticipating similar results. They are beginning with 3 teams, and if it works, will move out from there.
The quality of work within the agency was a main concern of legislators, and Cox indicated that quality goals of 95% accuracy must be met in order for an employee to qualify for the incentive awards.
UPEA is continuing to follow this issue very closely. An additional presentation on pay-for-performance for DCFS is scheduled to be heard tomorrow in the Social Services Appropriations Subcommittee at 8:00AM.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
More Like the Private Sector?
The Utah Advisory Commission to Optimize State Government presented their recommendations to Governor Herbert on August 19. Fraser Bullock, the Commission’s Vice Chair, presented a summary of the report to the Legislative Executive Appropriations Committee September 14, 2010.
The report highlights 56 recommendations that present reducing or eliminating waste and restructuring state government. Bullock noted that “the Commission recognized it is more difficult to optimize with $700 million already eliminated. How far and deep can you cut, when a lot has already been done effectively?” Therefore the Commission recommended the need to:
1. Restructure state government to drive continue efficiency improvement; and
2. Systematically change the mix between state employees’ salary and benefit to better reflect private sector practices.
Bullock suggested aligning incentives through a pay for performance plan in state government, similar to how the private sector uses pay to reward employees.
Senate President Michael Waddoups commented that State Government is not intended to run like a private business. Bullock responded, “while you don’t run state government for profit…the same principles of the private sector can be applied for effective service delivery. By finding savings through an efficient delivery of service, the state is able to use the excess money and apply it elsewhere.”
Sen. Daniel Liljenquist said state government already works like a business through its revenue sources. Liljenquist continued to say “the report is a good starting point for the Executive and Legislative Branches to come together and find ways to optimize our social objectives.”
In addition to restructuring state government, Bullock recommended “systematically changing the mix between state employee salary and benefits to better reflect the private sector.” The report stated that the average salary of state employees is 16.8% below private sector employees, while state employees’ average benefits are 19.5% greater.
Accurate compensation comparison data is required to better analyze the differences between the private and public sector. UPEA supports a more realistic compensation design that will enhance the state’s ability to attract and retain highly educated and trained employees.
UPEA has met with legislative leadership, Governor Herbert, and DHRM to garner support for UPEA’s proposed Compensation Commission. These policymakers will work with the Association in crafting appropriate legislation to make UPEA’s compensation proposals a reality.
The report highlights 56 recommendations that present reducing or eliminating waste and restructuring state government. Bullock noted that “the Commission recognized it is more difficult to optimize with $700 million already eliminated. How far and deep can you cut, when a lot has already been done effectively?” Therefore the Commission recommended the need to:
1. Restructure state government to drive continue efficiency improvement; and
2. Systematically change the mix between state employees’ salary and benefit to better reflect private sector practices.
Bullock suggested aligning incentives through a pay for performance plan in state government, similar to how the private sector uses pay to reward employees.
Senate President Michael Waddoups commented that State Government is not intended to run like a private business. Bullock responded, “while you don’t run state government for profit…the same principles of the private sector can be applied for effective service delivery. By finding savings through an efficient delivery of service, the state is able to use the excess money and apply it elsewhere.”
Sen. Daniel Liljenquist said state government already works like a business through its revenue sources. Liljenquist continued to say “the report is a good starting point for the Executive and Legislative Branches to come together and find ways to optimize our social objectives.”
In addition to restructuring state government, Bullock recommended “systematically changing the mix between state employee salary and benefits to better reflect the private sector.” The report stated that the average salary of state employees is 16.8% below private sector employees, while state employees’ average benefits are 19.5% greater.
Accurate compensation comparison data is required to better analyze the differences between the private and public sector. UPEA supports a more realistic compensation design that will enhance the state’s ability to attract and retain highly educated and trained employees.
UPEA has met with legislative leadership, Governor Herbert, and DHRM to garner support for UPEA’s proposed Compensation Commission. These policymakers will work with the Association in crafting appropriate legislation to make UPEA’s compensation proposals a reality.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
UPEA is hard at work – Protecting your Rights
On June 8th, 2010, UPEA staff and representatives presented at a DHRM Hearing that UPEA requested regarding proposed rule changes that are to go into effect on July 1st.
UPEA shared concerns regarding rule changes including modifications to the recruitment, highly sensitive position, employee development, and discrimination and harassment policies.
UPEA staff insisted that employees are concerned that job positions continue to be recruited through a "competitive" and transparent process as this is a core merit principle.
UPEA and DHRM staff held a healthy discussion on the highly sensitive positions and information regarding "household composition" being added. UPEA requested that this term either be removed or defined as it is vague in nature.
While no changes were made immediately, DHRM staff expressed a willingness to look at and change a few items that were discussed. It will remain to be seen what actually gets some attention.
As an additional note, because of the efforts of UPEA - with regard to the DHRM rule changes, a section was added into the rule that allowed RIF’d employees that were rehired within a year to reinstate their Program I Sick Leave hours rather than having them all go back to Program II Sick Leave. This benefits employees as they will be able to use earned Program I hours upon retirement.
UPEA shared concerns regarding rule changes including modifications to the recruitment, highly sensitive position, employee development, and discrimination and harassment policies.
UPEA staff insisted that employees are concerned that job positions continue to be recruited through a "competitive" and transparent process as this is a core merit principle.
UPEA and DHRM staff held a healthy discussion on the highly sensitive positions and information regarding "household composition" being added. UPEA requested that this term either be removed or defined as it is vague in nature.
While no changes were made immediately, DHRM staff expressed a willingness to look at and change a few items that were discussed. It will remain to be seen what actually gets some attention.
As an additional note, because of the efforts of UPEA - with regard to the DHRM rule changes, a section was added into the rule that allowed RIF’d employees that were rehired within a year to reinstate their Program I Sick Leave hours rather than having them all go back to Program II Sick Leave. This benefits employees as they will be able to use earned Program I hours upon retirement.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Retirement and Independent Entities Committee Meeting 2/10/10
Opposing sides gave little ground during today's Senate Retirement and Independent Entities Committee meeting at the capitol. Utah Public Employees' Association has made their arguments clear through Saturday's rally and a year's worth of work leading up to today.
There wasn't much left for Liljenquist's presentation except to rehash his proposals and the dire circumstances behind his proposals. UPEAadded voices to the economic impacts families face in light of retirement changes. Sheri Watters testified that her family has a long history of public service and that the retirement system has served their family fairly.
Senator Brent Goodfellow raised questions about Utah's current retirement system. He addressed the scope of SB 63 in light of an improving economy and improving stock market.
Goodfellow said, "Yes we have problems, but they're not the same problems we had when the DOW was at 6500."
SB 63 assumes the worst case scenario for our retirement system over the long run.
Liljenquist added that employees will defer compensation increases well into the future because of the retirement downturn. However, he did not say how any savings in the retirement system will go toward compensation.
Under the pro tem chairmanship of Senator Bramble, the committee opted to continue hearing testimony on Friday, at noon, before taking action on the three senate bills.
UPEA will update you soon!
There wasn't much left for Liljenquist's presentation except to rehash his proposals and the dire circumstances behind his proposals. UPEAadded voices to the economic impacts families face in light of retirement changes. Sheri Watters testified that her family has a long history of public service and that the retirement system has served their family fairly.
Senator Brent Goodfellow raised questions about Utah's current retirement system. He addressed the scope of SB 63 in light of an improving economy and improving stock market.
Goodfellow said, "Yes we have problems, but they're not the same problems we had when the DOW was at 6500."
SB 63 assumes the worst case scenario for our retirement system over the long run.
Liljenquist added that employees will defer compensation increases well into the future because of the retirement downturn. However, he did not say how any savings in the retirement system will go toward compensation.
Under the pro tem chairmanship of Senator Bramble, the committee opted to continue hearing testimony on Friday, at noon, before taking action on the three senate bills.
UPEA will update you soon!
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Update on HB 140
UPEA staff met with DHRM about HB 140 yesterday (2/9/10). In the meeting, DHRM explained that the intent for changing the pay system was to try to encourage more merit pay increases by removing the steps from the pay plan. If only 1% is available, the legislature could grant a 1% merit step increase rather than being limited to 2.75%. UPEA is in the process of researching the plan, and will be meeting with DHRM again next week to discuss UPEA’s viewpoint on this plan.
The changes to the grievance process as explained were due to conflicts that have been found with the Attorney General’s Office and costs associated with the grievances handled at the Career Service Review Board.
UPEA has scheduled a meeting for Thursday (2/11/10) with the sponsor of the bill, Representative Brad Dee.
The changes to the grievance process as explained were due to conflicts that have been found with the Attorney General’s Office and costs associated with the grievances handled at the Career Service Review Board.
UPEA has scheduled a meeting for Thursday (2/11/10) with the sponsor of the bill, Representative Brad Dee.
Monday, February 8, 2010
HB 140
Late Friday evening a new bill became publicly available that deals with State Employees. HB 140, Human Resource Management Amendments, was introduced to the House on 2/8/10. It has been sent to the Rules Committee for assignment.
HB 140 is something high on UPEA’s radar, because it deals with several public employee issues, including:
· Taking the merit steps out of the pay scale
· Changing the language related to the post-retirement sick leave benefit
· Changing the grievance process
· Changing the grievable actions that may be taken to the Career Service Review Office
On 2/8/10, UPEA met with legal counsel to ensure that staff understood what was being presented. UPEA staff also has a meeting scheduled with the Department of Human Resource Management on 2/9/10 to discuss the intent behind the proposed changes.
UPEA will continue to update members as to what is happening with HB 140 as more information becomes available.
HB 140 is something high on UPEA’s radar, because it deals with several public employee issues, including:
· Taking the merit steps out of the pay scale
· Changing the language related to the post-retirement sick leave benefit
· Changing the grievance process
· Changing the grievable actions that may be taken to the Career Service Review Office
On 2/8/10, UPEA met with legal counsel to ensure that staff understood what was being presented. UPEA staff also has a meeting scheduled with the Department of Human Resource Management on 2/9/10 to discuss the intent behind the proposed changes.
UPEA will continue to update members as to what is happening with HB 140 as more information becomes available.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Executive Offices & Criminal Justice Appropriations Subcommittee 2/3/10
The committee heard from County Sheriffs, the Board of Pardons, and Department of Corrections. The fiscal analyst went over the budget brief on each department.
Tom Patterson, the Executive Director of the Department of Corrections, presented on the budget of DOC. Some of the items that were discussed to address the 5% total budget reduction were to close the Parole Violator Center which would save $7.6 Million, eliminate meals for Correctional Officers which would save $400,000, and close two prison housing units which would save $3.8 Million.
Corrections discussed the risks involved with closing Special Services Dorm and OQuirrh 5 housing unit. If these two pods were to close the Utah Prison would be over maximum capacity by 215 beds. This would mean releasing 215 inmates early, and the prison would still be at maximum capacity. Tom discussed the risks involved to staff and also to the
Tom Patterson, the Executive Director of the Department of Corrections, presented on the budget of DOC. Some of the items that were discussed to address the 5% total budget reduction were to close the Parole Violator Center which would save $7.6 Million, eliminate meals for Correctional Officers which would save $400,000, and close two prison housing units which would save $3.8 Million.
Corrections discussed the risks involved with closing Special Services Dorm and OQuirrh 5 housing unit. If these two pods were to close the Utah Prison would be over maximum capacity by 215 beds. This would mean releasing 215 inmates early, and the prison would still be at maximum capacity. Tom discussed the risks involved to staff and also to the
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
