Tuolumne County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
Tuolumne County Compensation and Benefits - Board of Supervisors*
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 1 findings
F3
¥F4 unemployment statistics presented above; and 2) former and current County employees have also suffered the loss of their homes along with other local residents, Appendix CCB-4 shows a calculation of the number of full time equivalent positions that the current minimum of paid and unpaid leave days for all employees is equal to. The calculation results in a total of approximately 105 positions (paid leave plus furlough full time equivalents positions), While it is not feasible to eliminate all leave days, some reduction would result in a more efficient and consistent work force. Appendix CCB-4 also shows the result of reducing the number of leave days as recommended below. Response: Agree with the premise that a reduction in leave days would result in an increase in productive (worked) hours.and decrease in unproductive (paid leave) hours. No effort was made to verify the numbers provided in Appendix CCB-4. Worker’s compensation has always been an area that draws scrutiny. Is it a true work related incident or was the employee not paying attention? Reading over the reports many are truly work related and were not avoidable. Others could have been avoided with good safety procedures and a little more common sense. The County no longer has a dedicated risk management person to oversee safety training and conduct inspections on a regular basis. Response: Agree. The County pension plan through PERS is in serious jeopardy due to underfunding. The cost to the County for PERS is exorbitant. While not illegal, the paying of the employee share is certainly very generous and not in line with the private sector. It is not known what the impact of underfunding of PERS will ultimately be, but it seems obvious that it cannot be good for the County financial situation. Response: Agree. Grand Jury Recommendations RI The County should negotiate with representatives of bargaining units to come up with a plan to reduce benefits by a significant percentage. Bargaining unit members should be aware that unsustainable benefits are just that — unsustainable. Some possible outcomes are the collapse of PERS or bankruptcy of County government, as have occurred in Vallejo and Stockton. At the very least, more “outsourcing” of County jobs can be expected.
Recommendations 3
-
R2R3 Response: This recommendation has been partially implemented with securing the 2" Tier PERS program for all employees who join the County after March 12, 2011. Retirement benefits will continue to be one of many points of discussion in future labor negotiations. The County’s current unfunded PERS liabilities are significant and payments to PERS continue to be one of the fastest growing expense lines in the County Budget. This is a serious issue but the suggestion that this would lead the County to bankruptcy is unwarranted. The County is nowhere near such a position and continues taking the tough actions necessary to ensure that it doesn’t. The County should reevaluate their decision to eliminate a full time risk manager. A full time risk manager might be able to focus on safety education programs in each department and require employees to follow the procedures. County employees, along with management, should exercise good judgment in all that they do regarding official business. They should be held accountable for any lack of responsibility for theirs or other’s safety. Response; This recommendation will not be implemented, First, the overall Risk Management function is a huge responsibility with significant financial and human resource consequences that should remain one of the key responsibilities of the HR/Risk Manager under the supervision of the CAO/Personnel Officer. Second, even when the County had a position dedicated to risk management functions, the position was entitled “Risk Management Analyst” under the supervision of the HR/Risk Manager. Third, the CAO and HR/Risk Manager question the need for a full-time position dedicated solely to Risk Management functions. If a third professional position were added back to the HR division, the needs of the organization would be better served with an HR Analyst whe could perform a variety of duties (a generalist) with emphasis on risk management issues. The timing of adding a position back into the organization is also an issue. This would inject additional costs that would be passed on to departments through “mandated” workers compensation and liability insurance charges at a time budgets are extraordinarily tight. However, the current HR/Risk Manager, who has extensive workplace safety background, will be retiring before the end of FY 2012-13. For the reasons cited above, the CAO will consider adding an HR Analyst (a generalist) with emphasis on risk management issues back into the AR Division but not until FY 2013-14 or FY 2014-15. Until then, existing HR staff will continue to provide leadership of the County’s Safety Connnittee and safety training programs in conjunction with a dedicated team of department safety officers. Over the past 10 years, this team has been able to help significantly reduce both the number of workers compensation incidents and incurred costs. The County should investigate the feasibility of converting to a plan similar to a 401K for local governments and reduce its contributions. Other local governments
-
R4RS have done so and are not facing the PERS problems. At a minimum the County should require all employees to contribute the employee share of PERS. Response: This recommendation has been partially implemented in that research has been done and retirement reforms have and will continue to be one of many points of discussion in future labor negotiations. The County should adopt a proactive plan to support Governor Brown’s Twelve Point Pension Reform Plan, (see
-
R6The County should investigate the feasibility of a-self insured medical, dental and vision plan with stop loss insurance to better control-costs. The County cafeteria contribution should be the same across all. bargaining units. Employees who “opt.out” should not be entitled fo receive payment for opting-out. Presumably the County has a ‘coordination of benefits clause” in their insurance policies to prevent double payments. If this is not the case, a coordination of benefits clause should be included in any future contracts. Response: Health insurance benefits are an important element of the County’s overall compensation system. This recommendation has been partially implemented in that HR staff is continuously researching alternative health care packages in the hopes of discovering high quality options at competitive prices. Health care insurance programs and cafeteria payments will continue to be one of many points of discussion in future labor negotiations, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above findings and recommendations. Please feel free to contact the County Administrator Craig Pedro should you have any questions regarding same, Yours truly, RICHARD PLAND, Chair CRAIG L. PEDRO Board of Supervisors County Administrator J hereby certify that according to the provisions of Government Code Section 25403, delivery of this document has been made. MAR ing Board By:
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.