04/29/1969 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ e n ..1 , .t\" V.i....~O . 4/2~(69 I Council Chambers Eugene, Oregon April 29, 1969 Adjourned meeting of the Common Council of the city'of Eugene, Oregon - adjourned from the meeting of April 28, 1969 - was called to order by His Honor Mayor Lester E. 4nderson at 7:30 p.m. on April 29, 1969 in the Council Chamber with the following councilmen present; Mrs. Hayward, Messrs. McDonald, and Wingard, Mrs. Bea1 and'Messrs. Gribskov an'd,Mohr. ." The City Manager read a motion made the previous evening which said that the Manager be instructed to prepare and present to the budget committee a schedule of salaries for firemen equal to the salary schedule for police, up to the two top positions 'in each department. Mr. McKinley said in attempting to comply with that directive he was presenting salary schedules which compared his recommendation and that of the firefighters. e Mr. Mohr said it was always difficult to assess the impact. of a set of figures, and he did not want the Council to get into the position of setting exact ~a1ary levels for each position. Mr s. Bea 1 in 1962. have been asked if this plan would The Manager explained at equivalent at that time. raise the firemen to the position of parity they had enjoyed that time they did not have Patrolmen B. and C.. Firemen' would I Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. McDonald that to the Council by the City Manager at this time. said she meant the plan for "parity" proposed in the Council approve the salary schedule presented A c1a~ification was requested. Mrs. Hayward the City Manager's memo of April 29, 19p9. Mrs. Bea1 said that rather than just be given a set of figures, she would like to take this under advisement and bring it up at Wednesday's Committee meeting, and continue with the rest of the budget work. There was further discussion of the two plans, and whether the Council should be deciding salaries. Mr. Jackson explained the reasoning behind their proposal, and compared firemen and patrolmen and their duties. Mr. Mohr said the question before the Council is to establish m~n~ma and maxima salary range as' between policemen and firemen. Tgey are not engaged in determination of personnel policies within those ranges. Mr. Flynn asked to point out that the City Manager I s version of parity was' the firefighters. con- ciliatory proposal, previously presented to the City Manager, which would have been presented to the budget committee, had the budget committee not rejected it and referred the question to the Counci 1. The City Manager said that this proposal was not his recommendation, but was the recommendation after the motion of last night. He said it should be understood a Patr.olman C is not .an automatic increase, I but is determined through educational qualification and a point system. I Mr. Mohr said as he understood the substance of his motiQn of last night, it was addressed to the problem of the Fire Department as a whole, matched against the Police Department as a whole. What is presented tonight is a different kind of problem; a different issue than originally was taken. Mr. Mohr did not believe that this was the time .or place to discuss the individual cases within the, range. e Mr. N.ohn McMahon read figures from 1960 and said the pay scale had gradually gotten wider and wider. He pointed out the disparity in wages between firemen and policemen. Mayor Anderson asked to go .back to his original recommendation to the Council that a committee of the Council, along with a third party, at least go over this material and talk to representatives of the firefighters and City Manager, and hopefully bring back some recommendation on definition of terms on which agreement can be reached. Mrs. Hayward asked to vote on the motion and see if they could get it passed. Perhaps they had learned a lesson and there may be a better way of arriving at salaries than that in which the Council had been engaged. Mrs. Bea1 suggested an amendment to compromffise might be to put all firemen in Range 19, instead of in 18 or 20. Mr. Wingard secondedrtithe amendment. I The Manager did not think this would solve the problem without creating others. This would create a disparity between starting patrolmen and 'starting firemen. If the motion was adopted as originally made, the staff would be glad to work with the Fire Chief to determine whether there is a logical and justifiable basis for creating two ranges of firemen, based upon such .things as education and achievement. Mr. Mohr said this was a personnel administration policy and should not be before the Council. Mrs. Bea1 suggested to cut. down on any source of disagreement, 50% of the firemen could be raised and beginning firemen could be put at Range 18. The Manager said he could not make that judgment at this time. e Mrs. Bea1 said she liked the Manager's suggestion to work firemen up to Range 19. I /I ,I 4/29/69 -'1 - 1'..oiIIl