Travis County Commissioners Court
September 8, 2009,
Item 15
15.
consider and take appropriate action on 345 job descriptions in 10 job families that were affected by the classification and compensation 3-year strategic plan job analysis projects, in accordance with Travis County code section 10.080, job descriptions.
>> okay.
good morning, Commissioners.
>> good morning.
>> my name is todd osborne, the compensation manager here at Travis County.
to my right
>> [indiscernible] human resources manager, to her right,
>> [indiscernible], human resources compensation division.
we are here to seek approval for 345 job descriptions and 10 job families.
this is the second and final batch that will be brought for approval under county code 10.0800.
first batch was brought on 8-25.
the job families that we are asking you to approve this time are general/road maintenance, steel trades, administrative support, social services, engineering and support services, courts, finance, senior/real management, human resources and information technology.
and you can check 7 through -- pages 7 through 15 in the backup.
as a reminder and holdover from last time, this is a carryover of the strategic plan cycle that ended in fy 2008.
the pay grade titles and status for all of these job descriptions have already been approved and implemented.
today recommended action would essentially have no impact upon the approaches decisions in terms of status title and pay grade.
however, today's action would essentially put a period on the final projects that are on the project that's we are doing
>> [papers shuffling - audio interference] and would be effective on 10-1-09.
there's no cost impact associated with the proposed action today.
now, by and large, most of these job descriptions are fairly routine, there were some fairly significant changes and a couple of job descriptions.
and those are situated in the finance family and that is what I would like to turn your attention to right now.
first and probably the most significant change that was made was the elimination of the -- what we call the experience equivalency for some jobs that are over the rank of county associate within the finance family.
this was done in response to a shift in the market, which is showing that -- that a degree is necessary and required for an advanced finance position and we have seen an additional professionalism and sophistication level within these jobs which requires a degree and the degree is -- essentially ensures an understanding of the theory behind the county practices, which is necessary to perform the jobs.
at a sufficient level of -- of skill.
we have found that in the marketplace our peers are also making the same type of change where they are eliminating the equivalency supplement and we do believe that these jobs will continue to grow in sophistication and complaints as the county implements the b fit project that's coming up.
probably the easiest way to illustrate the change that we're talking about here is that in the past we would have a position that would have a, say, a bachelor's degree and one year of experience as a minimum qualification.
what we would do in the past is we would allow somebody that say had five years of experience to come in that would fulfill that requirement because we would also have a bachelor's plus 1 or equivalent.
the or equivalent statement would allow somebody to come in with five years of experience instead of holding the degree in the one year.
what we're doing for these advanced level finance positions is we are asking that that's equivalency requirement be taken out and that -- that it would ensure that these positions have the -- have the educational degree that's required to perform in the position.
the second primary change that we are looking at adding is that we're adding a -- a level of skills for duties, duties in school levels, ranging from routine to highly complex and also -- also basic to advanced level of skill for computers, analysis and communication.
and really what we're trying to do here is we're trying to define what level of competency, what level of skill is expected within the various levels of these positions.
finally, the -- the third primary change that we're asking to make is making the distinction between those jobs that are operating within the departments and those that are operating essentially county-wide.
for example, jobs within the auditor's office and p.b.o.
essentially taking on a county-wide finance level or some of the other jobs that are working within the departments themselves.
we're hoping that in time that -- that this clarification of the skill levels will lead to a more consistent application of titles across the county and potentially once these skill levels are fully flushed out and defined, we can also implement potentially some testing.
as people come into the positions, we can get a verification of those skill levels.
i do want to point out to you that we realize that this is a fairly significant change within this family and there would potentially be impact on current employees, but what we proposed to do is to grandfather current employees in so that -- so that we couldn't -- could not have to take somebody out of a position just because they didn't meet the current requirements.
if they came in under the previous administration, the previous rules of engagement they would certainly be able to hold on those positions, the goal would be in the future, meeting new qualifications and duty levels.
current employees certainly would also be allowed to be eligible for promotion.
if they were selected for a position but did not necessarily meet the specific new job requirements, that promotion would essentially come as a non-routine personnel action.
anyway, we ask for your approval and the code.
we are here for any questions that you may have.
>> questions or comments?
if we look at page 10 of the backup memo, where I see ne and e that stands for exempt and non-exempt?
>> correct.
>> that's correct.
>> okay.
and the new requirement of a degree, in order to fill an advanced financial position, so advanced would start at the accountant.
>> within that series, yes, that's correct.
>> but the -- but the college degree would not be required in those first two, but it would be required in the -- in the -- all of the ones with an e?
is that correct?
>> yes.
if you turned to page 5 of your backup.
>> okay.
>> and look at -- look at the fifth column from the left, the current equivalency.
>> okay.
>> that number, you can see that column is all yeses.
so that means that there is the equivalency.
that's the current practice.
the next column is indicating that -- that's our recommendation, where the first two, county clerk and accountant associate will have the equivalency.
the -- starting with the accountant and then the accountant, the -- accountant series, financial analyst series, corporation and investment manager, probate auditor, would -- the equivalency would no longer be -- be included in the job description.
>> all right.
basically if it's an exempt position in the future, the degree would be required?
>> yes.
>> yes.
>> we have to analyze each and every job.
but for purposes of what we have in terms of existing classifications that is correct.
>> okay.
and the departments that -- that hire people into these jobs, consultant, nor this change, are generally in agreement.
>> yes.
>> okay.
any other questions or comments?
those were the only dramatic changes, you think?
>> yes.
>> yes, sir.
>> everything else is fairly routine.
>> fairly standard.
>> yes.
>> was that a motion to approve, Commissioner.
>> yes.
>> second.
>> discussion of the motion?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
so we have cleaned up all of our job descriptions county-wide.
now --
>> that are classified.
the -- the elected officials, appointed officials, pops, those still need to be processed through the compensation division through the department.
but for classified job titles, yes.
>> all right.
so non-classified is still on our work plan?
>> yes.
>> for next year?
>> yes.
>> correct.
>> okay.
thank you very much for your outstanding service.
>> thank you.
now, blaine is here for -- the fourth revenue estimate, which is item no.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, September 8, 2009 2:14 PM
