HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 374 Draft 01 1980-1984County of Hawaii—State of Hawaii
Resolution N6.374 82
WHEREAS, pursuant to County.Charter Section 3-14 interim amend-
ments to.the Salary Ordinance may be by resolution;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF
HAWAII that the Salary Ordinance is hereby amended for the following
department:.
SECTION 8.03. OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL.
1. Adjust pay grade of one position of Deputy Corporation
Counsel LS -9 to LS -10.
2. Adjust pay grade of one position of Deputy Corporation
Counsel LS -7 to LS -8.
3. Adjust pay grade of four positions of Deputy Corporation
Counsel LS -5 to LS -7.
FEDERAL/COUNTY-PROJECT FUNDED -EXEMPT POSITIONS (EXHIBIT E)
SECTION 8.03.. OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUt]SEL.
CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION
1. Adjust pay grade of one position of Deputy Corporation
Counsel LS -5 to LS -8.
2. Adjust pay grade of one position of Deputy Corporation
Counsel LS -2 to LS -4.
This resolution shall amend the Salary Ordinance of 1981 and
incorporated into the Salary Ordinance of 1982, after adoption.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be
transmitted to the departments of Corporation Counsel, Finance and
Civil Service for their information.
Dated at Hilo, Hawaii, this 7th day of June 1982.
INTRODUCED BY:
Councilman, County of Haw ii
COUNTY COUNCIL
County of Hawaii
Hilo, Hawaii
I hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION was by the vote indicated to
the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the County of Hawaii on
June 7, 1982
ATTEST:
<��'
COUNNTT Y CL RK
P IDING OFFICER
ROLL CALL VOTE
AYES NOES A/
Dahlberg
x
De Luz, III
X
Domingo
x
Fujii
x
Hale
x
Kawahara
x
Lai
x
Schutte
x
Chr. Yamashiro
x
9 0 0
Reference: C-826/FC-198
M.B. No.
RESOLUTION NO
374
HAWAII UNTY COUNCIL POSITION IN�RMATION FORM
Department: CORPORATION COUNSEL Date: January 29, 1982
Request: Reallocation Reclassification New Position
Salary Increase X
1. Give reasons how new duties arose (statutes enacted, Ordinances,
Newly authorized programs, basis for increased workloads, etc.):
N/A
2. If reallocation, list only new duties.(Example: 1. Takes
dictation 40%; 2. Keeps office accounts 30%, etc.):
N/A
3. Give reasons why new duties at higher level are needed and cannot -
be assigned to classes at higher level or handled in other ways -
such as short term contracts, etc. (Use productivity measurements
where possible.):
N/A
Class Title
HC No.
SR
Salary
Cost
Diff.
Fund
Source
$ of Pos.
in Dept.
Old
Deputy Corpora-
S-2
Counsel
to
$203,292
--
General
8
Pos.
-tion
S-9
New
Deputy Corpora-
S-4
tion Counsel
to
o10
$219,132
$15,840
General
8
Pos.
1. Give reasons how new duties arose (statutes enacted, Ordinances,
Newly authorized programs, basis for increased workloads, etc.):
N/A
2. If reallocation, list only new duties.(Example: 1. Takes
dictation 40%; 2. Keeps office accounts 30%, etc.):
N/A
3. Give reasons why new duties at higher level are needed and cannot -
be assigned to classes at higher level or handled in other ways -
such as short term contracts, etc. (Use productivity measurements
where possible.):
N/A
4. Was reallocation or reclassification budgeted and,if not, why were
manpower needs not planned through budgetary process?
N/A
5. List other rationale or pertinent statements and data:
See Exhibit C.
6. Attach:
a.
Old
Table
of Organization
(See Exhibit A)
b.
New
Table
of Organization
with changes clearly visible
(See Exhibit B)
c.
Old
class
specification
d.
New
class
specification
CIVIL SERVICE NOTE:
Salary adjustments based on increased level of sill required on assignments.
Direc ersonnel
1. Rationale of Proposed Change.
Annual Increase in Salary. The Salary Commission
recommended and the Mayor and Council approved pay raises for
the deputies in January, 1981. One year has now passed since
the last salary increase was granted during which time it has
become considerably more expensive to live. In addition the
staff now has one more year of experience, resulting in an
increased level of skill in the office. Finally, the entire
staff performed outstandingly last year, meriting an increase in
salary.
Comparison to Civil Service Increase. All civil servants
enjoy an annual increase in pay. Although the Legislature has
not seen fit to confer civil service status or the right to
bargain collectively on the deputies, I believe they should
be entitled to expect and receive benefits simlar to those
granted to civil servants. Regular increases in salary is one
of the benefits.
The deputies in this office work long hours. They routinely
put in more than forty hours per week. Unlike civil servants,
they are not compensated for the excess hours. At the very
least this dedication should be rewarded with the modest salary
increase I am requesting.
Parity with Deputies of the Prosecuting Attorney's
Office. Although the nature of the legal work performed by
the prosecutors differs from that performed by our deputies,.
the skills required and the difficulty of the work are
equivalent. However, the present salary ordinance assigns
substantially higher grades to the prosecutor's deputies
than to the deputies in this office. The prosecutor's
deputies' salary grades range from LS -7 to LS -13, while the
deputies in this office range from LS -2 to LS -9.
The prosecutor's office has nine positions at LS -7, one
at LS -8, two at LS -12, and one at LS -13. My request will bring
the grades of the deputies in this office closer to those of
the prosecutor'.s.
2. Impaceof Proposed Change
The proposed change will increase the salaries of the
deputies a total of $15,840 per year. This amount has been
budgeted into the salary account for FY 1982-83. For the
period between January 1, 1982 and June 30, 1982, the change
will require $7,910. Our salary account is adequate to handle
this amount.
EXHIBIT C.
Ln
N
0
0
N U1
U 0 O
x * 4J
Ln c U) U1
a0
m
- r� .0
EM
,o
O
O
0
I
N
N
O
mN
O n o
In
U o
(1)ONi O 1
aJ o 1
Jr
17
)
in 17-'
!
•,-1 to��
f M
.-1
u1 ao
N
C1 1
N I
Q'1'
O
O
0