Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2025 Salary & Compensation Study
Miami Shores Village Resolution 2025-____ 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF MIAMI SHORES VILLAGE, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION STUDY PREPARED BY EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC; PROVIDING FOR IMPLEMENTATION; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Miami Shores Village (the “Village”) remains committed to attracting and retaining a talented workforce in order to deliver high-quality services to its residents; and WHEREAS, in keeping with this commitment, the Village determined that its compensation and classification systems and structures required an update to better reflect current best practices; and WHEREAS, in July 2024, the Village engaged Evergreen Solutions, LLC (“Evergreen”) to conduct a comprehensive Compensation and Classification Study; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the Village’s existing compensation and classification systems, conduct a job and pay grade analysis for internal equity, gather peer salary data for external equity, and propose adjustments to align the Village’s system with the competitive market; and WHEREAS, the findings of the study provide Village Council with valuable insight regarding employee demographics, feedback, internal equity, external market comparisons, and recommended structural improvements; and WHEREAS, the Village Council has reviewed the Compensation and Classification Study and desires to accept the recommendations therein, specifically the "Hybrid Approach," and direct staff to begin implementation in a manner that is fiscally responsible and consistent with Village priorities. Miami Shores Village Resolution 2025-____ 2 WHEREAS, the Village Council finds that this Resolution is in the best interest and welfare of the residents of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Village Council of Miami Shores Village, Miami Shores, Florida that: Section 1. Recitals Adopted. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. __________________________ Mayor Jerome Charles ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Section 2. Acceptance. The Village Council hereby accepts the Compensation and Classification Study prepared by Evergreen Solutions, LLC, attached as Exhibit “A,” including the "Hybrid Approach" recommendation contained therein. Section 3. Implementation. The Village Manager is hereby authorized and directed to begin implementation of the recommendations, including but not limited to the adoption of revised job classifications and pay structures, as funding and operational planning allow. Implementation of the recommendations shall be subject to available funding, and any adjustments requiring a budget amendment shall be brought before the Village Council for separate review and approval. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon the adoption hereof. Miami Shores Village Resolution 2025-____ 3 Ysabely Rodriguez, CMC Village Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: ________________________________ Village Attorney Weiss Serota Helfman Cole & Bierman P.L. Miami Shores Village Resolution 2025-____ 4 Exhibit A COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION STUDY April 23, 2025 Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL FINAL REPORT PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Study Methodology ............................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 Report Organization .......................................................................................... 1-3 2.0 SUMMARY OF EMPLOYEE OUTREACH .................................................................. 2-1 2.1 General Feedback ............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Compensation and Classification ..................................................................... 2-2 2.3 Market Peers ..................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4 Summary ............................................................................................................ 2-4 3.0 ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT CONDITIONS ............................................................... 3-1 3.1 Analysis of Pay Plans ......................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Summary ............................................................................................................ 3-4 4.0 MARKET SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Market Data ....................................................................................................... 4-3 4.2 Salary Survey Results ........................................................................................ 4-6 4.3 Salary Survey Conclusion ............................................................................... 4-11 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Classification Recommendations ..................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Compensation Recommendations ................................................................... 5-2 5.3 Compensation and Classification System Administration .............................. 5-4 5.4 Summary ............................................................................................................ 5-7 EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Table of Contents Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 1-1 The leadership of Miami Shores Village (the “Village”) in keeping with its commitment to attracting and retaining the employees necessary to provide high quality services determined that its current compensation and classification systems and structures needed to be updated to better reflect best practices. Evergreen Solutions, LLC (“Evergreen”) was selected by the Village during July of 2024 as its partner to accomplish this goal. This engagement sought to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the Village’s current systems, conduct a job and pay grade analysis to study internal equity, collect peer salary data to study external equity, and adjust the current compensation and classification systems to better reflect the market. This study and the analysis contained within provides Village leadership with valuable information related to their employee demographics, opinions, and market data, as well as internal and external equity. Internal equity relates to the fairness of the Village’s compensation practices among its current employees. Specifically, by reviewing the skills, responsibilities, and duties of each position, it can be determined whether similar positions are being compensated in an equitable manner within the Village. External equity relates to the differences between how the Village’s classifications are valued and the compensation available in the marketplace for the same skills, responsibilities, and duties. This component of the study aims to address how the Village is positioned in the market relative to other local area government Villages with similar positions and to develop recommendations that allow the Village to recruit and retain quality employees. The classification component of this study resolves any inconsistencies related to job requirements or job titles and ensures that all jobs are appropriately categorized and aligned with the work currently performed. 1.1 STUDY METHODOLOGY Evergreen Solutions combines qualitative and quantitative data analysis to produce recommendations that maximize the fairness and competitiveness of the Village’s compensation structure and practices. It is important to note that the data utilized in the study represents a snapshot in time. As market conditions can change rapidly, it is important for the Village to conduct regular market surveys to ensure their external market position does not decay. A full compensation and classification review is recommended approximately every three to five years. Some examples of project activities included: • Conducting a project kick-off meeting • Presenting orientation sessions to employees • Facilitating focus group sessions with employees • Conducting an external market salary survey EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 1 - Introduction Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 1-2 • Developing recommendations for compensation management • Revising classification descriptions based on employee JAT feedback • Developing recommendations for compensation and classification changes • Creating draft and final reports • Conducting training sessions with human resources staff in the methodology used to systematically assess job classifications Kickoff Meeting The kickoff meeting provided an opportunity to discuss the history of the Village, finalize the work plan, and begin the data collection process. Data collection included the gathering of relevant background material including existing pay plans, organization charts, policies, procedures, training materials, classification specifications, and other pertinent material. Employee Outreach Through the orientation sessions, Evergreen consultants briefed employees on the purpose and major processes of the study. This process addressed employee questions and provided foundational information about the study and related tasks and explained the importance of employee participation in the JAT process. In addition, employees participated in focus group sessions designed to gather input from their varied perspectives as to the strengths and weaknesses of the current system. Feedback received from employees in this context was helpful in highlighting aspects of the Village which needed particular attention and consideration. This information provided some basic perceptional background, as well as a starting point for the research process. Job Assessment Tool© (JAT) Classification Analysis Employees were asked to complete individual JAT surveys, where they shared information pertaining to their work in their own words. These JATs were analyzed and compared to the current classification descriptions, and classifications were individually scored based on employee responses to five compensable factor questions. Each of the compensable factors— Leadership, Working Conditions, Complexity, Decision Making, and Relationships—were given weighted values based on employee responses, resulting in a point factor score for each classification. The rank order of classes by JAT scores was used to develop a rank order of classes within the proposed compensation structure. Combined with market data, this information formed the foundation of the combined recommendations. The nature of each compensable factor is described below: • Leadership –relates to the employee’s leadership role, be it as an individual contributor, or as an executive who leads a department or the Village. • Working Conditions – captures the employee’s physical working conditions and the employee’s impact on those conditions, as well as the working conditions’ impact or potential impact on the employee. Chapter 1 - Introduction Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 1-3 • Complexity – describes the nature of work performed and includes options ranging from entry-level manual or clerical tasks up to advanced scientific, legal, or executive management duties. • Decision Making – categorizes an individual’s decision-making responsibility. Are decisions made on behalf of the employee or is the employee making autonomous decisions that affect themselves, other employees, or even the Village? • Relationships – identifies the nature of the employee’s working relationships within the organizational structure. Responses range from employees who are individual contributors, working primarily alone, those who collaborate as members of a team, those who oversee teams, and those who oversee departments and the Village. Salary Survey The external market for this study was defined as identified local government organizations with similar positions as well as similar characteristics, demographics, and service offerings. All Village positions with incumbents were surveyed, although not all positions had matching positions at the peer organizations. The data were then analyzed comparing Village classifications to the jobs performing the same duties at peer Villages to gain a fuller understanding of their market position. Recommendations Evergreen developed recommendations for the Village to consider helping maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of its current compensation and classification structure. Evergreen provided the Village with a variety of recommendations for the future at various costs. Plans ranged from adjustments to the current compensation and classification system to wholesale changes to the entire organizational structure. These plans were designed to mitigate the concerns identified in this report, while continuing to build on the strengths the Village currently exhibits. 1.2 REPORT VILLAGE This report includes the following additional chapters: • Chapter 2 – Summary of Employee Outreach • Chapter 3 – Assessment of Current Conditions • Chapter 4 – Market Summary • Chapter 5 – Recommendations Chapter 2 – Summary of Outreach Outreach was conducted by an Evergreen consultant on October 16, 2024. The consultant met with Village employees to explain the study process and answer their related questions. Focus groups were conducted to solicit employees’ perceptions that informed Evergreen on areas to research and frame future recommendations. Employees provided Evergreen their Chapter 1 - Introduction Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 1-4 opinions on classifications that were broadly categorized, behind market, or had trouble retaining employees. Employees gave their opinions on relevant organizations in the shared labor market the Village competes in. Lastly, employees provided information on all the positive aspects of employment with the Village. Evergreen used employee opinions as a starting point for some data collection, but everything that was used during this study was independently verified by Evergreen. A full summary of the outreach can be found in Chapter 2 of this report. Chapter 3 - Assessment of Current Conditions An assessment of current conditions was conducted to help Evergreen better understand the current standing of the Village pay plan, demographics, and compensation structures. This assessment should be considered a snapshot in time and is reflective of the conditions present within the Village upon the commencement of this study. By leveraging this information, Evergreen was able to gain a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the current compensation system. When combined with the market results, the Assessment of Current Conditions helped provide a basis for recommendations. A summary of the Assessment of Current Conditions can be found in Chapter 3 of this report. Chapter 4 - Market Summary A salary survey containing benchmark classifications was designed by Evergreen and approved by the Village Manager. The external market was defined by Evergreen and approved by the Village Manager. The survey results were received and analyzed to establish the Village’s external equity. A full summary of the market results can be found in Chapter 4 of this report. Chapter 5 – Recommendations During the recommendations phase, Evergreen provided several solution options with varying strategies to address internal and external inequities. Solutions were provided that require more modest adjustments to the compensation and classification systems, and some solutions that would require wholesale changes to Village’s current structures. Evergreen has provided the Village with recommendations that can both enhance the compensation structure and strengthen its retention and recruitment competitiveness. A full explanation of the recommendations can be found in Chapter 5 of this report. Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-1 On October 16, 2024, an Evergreen consultant conducted two orientation sessions and six focus groups for Miami Shores Village, FL. Orientation sessions provided employees with a foundational understanding of the purpose and scope of the study. They were also familiarized with the venues where their participation in the project would be solicited, having an audience with the consultant to describe their job functions in detail through the Job Assessment Tool and focus group participation. During focus groups Village employees provided open feedback regarding several topics related to compensation, classification and employment with the Village more broadly. The goal in these engagements was to identify areas where the Village can capitalize on positive sentiments and/or areas where improvements could be warranted. This unique perspective of the Village through this lens can provide a clearer direction for recommendations later in this report, as applicable and once validated. This chapter expresses a generalized summary of opinions, general themes, and trends expressed by employees who either participated in a focus group or provided direct feedback to Evergreen. Information that may identify the commenter has been removed. It is important to note that the views shared in this summary are perceptional in nature and may not necessarily reflect actual conditions in the Village. Comments are separated by the following four categories below: 2.1 General Feedback 2.2 Compensation and Classification 2.3 Market Peers 2.4 Summary 2.1 GENERAL FEEDBACK The primary focus of this study is to address the Village’s compensation and classification structures. However, it is important to understand how employees currently view employment at large within the Village. As a result, general feedback was sourced from employees on what brought them to work for the Village and what were the primary factors that led to their continued employment. The comments described in this section reflect the factors that incentivize prospective applicants to pursue employment with the Village and reflect the reasons employees have decided to continue working for the Village. These elements are important to highlight, as compensation, while an important factor, is often not the sole determination for where employees wish to work. The responses varied from the retirement pension, the family atmosphere, and flexible work environment. Additional comments expressed by employees include: EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 2 – Summary of Employee Outreach Chapter 2 – Summary of Employee Outreach Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-2 • Benefits – Employees expressed that the retirement pension was a big factor in their continued employment. • Culture – Largely the most pervasive theme; most employees identified their coworkers as the number one reason they stay with the organization. Many also cited having a good relationship with their direct supervisor as a key reason for staying. Employees take pride in providing quality services to Village residents and demonstrate high rational and affective public service motivations. Employees also feel connected to the Village and can see the fruits of their efforts in real time. • Environment – Many employees said that the Village’s lush green space attracts employees to the Village. The employees’ contributions to maintaining these charming spaces, that provide the Village with its “warmth”, is a main reason for retention. Employees agree that they feel supported by the residents of the Village. • Schedule – Employees expressed their satisfaction with the hours worked, leading to a greater work life balance, especially by having weekends off as well as designated paid time off. Many also noted the commute was less taxing than to other employment options. Overall, personnel revealed that the Village is a wonderful and unique place to work with several distinct advantages in place for employees. 2.2 COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION As the main focus of this study, feedback on compensation and classification was solicited from employees. Employees were asked to identify any concerns, challenges, or limitations observed with how the Village currently compensates and classifies its positions. It is important to note that the perceptions of employees listed below may not be representative of the data collected in the market survey, found in Chapter 4. Specific feedback shared by employees related to compensation practices included the following: • External Equity – Feedback on the competitiveness of pay in the Village was mixed, with some employees sharing that their starting pay is lower than in other municipalities and even than that of the preceding incumbent of their current position. Salary increases have not historically been seen as consistently applied across the Village. Others mentioned that in years past starting pay for their position was higher than what is offered in the labor market, however that has since changed in some classifications. Specific positions that perceived their pay as below market included: ‒ Part-time positions across the Village ‒ Aquatics and Lifeguards ‒ Equipment Operators ‒ Maintenance Workers ‒ Recreation Specialists Chapter 2 – Summary of Employee Outreach Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-3 ‒ Solid Waste Collectors and Drivers ‒ Tree Trimmers • Internal Equity – Salary compression was commonly mentioned. Employees believe that new hires’ starting salaries are disproportionately high in relation to more tenured and experienced staff. New hires are believed to have a higher starting salary, as demanded by the labor market, while tenured employees are losing ground due to modest cost of living increases that are not sufficient for equity in the economy. Other concerns exist regarding part-time and full-time positions. Many part-time employees would like to see their positions expanded to full-time and are often forced to find full-time employment elsewhere. Some mentioned concerns that subordinates were more highly paid or too closely compensated to their supervisors, disincentivizing progression. • Turnover – Several positions were mentioned as positions that employees feel have a high turnover ratio. Those positions included: ‒ Planning and Zoning Director ‒ Aquatics / Lifeguards ‒ Part-time positions ‒ Communications ‒ Public Works / Field Maintenance • Vacancies – Classifications are thought to be overly broad. Some employees feel that they are utilized as more utility positions with ever-growing tasks and responsibilities rather than specialists. They feel they work out of their classification to support the needs of the Village without reciprocity. They believe this places an unfair burden on current employees, who are not compensated for the extra work they perform and feel underappreciated. • Professional Development – Employees indicated that there are not sufficient avenues for progression in classification nor in salary. Some have taken to a strategy of moving from one classification to another within the Village as a method to circumvent the perceived residual stagnation. Departments with employees mentioning this included: ‒ Public Works ‒ Library ‒ Police Department ‒ Planning and Zoning • Raises – The consensus was that raises across all major departments were not consistent. Additionally, employees mentioned sociability as a metric for compensation in the past. Additional concerns brought up regarding raises included: ‒ Complaints that merit increases ceased in 2008 ‒ Cost of living increases are not keeping pace with inflation or health insurance offerings. Chapter 2 – Summary of Employee Outreach Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-4 • Benefits (perceived strengths) – Most employees are satisfied with the offered benefits in their packages. However, they did not like the increasing costs for their coverage. • Communication – Some front-line employees feel that vertical communication is lacking, and they are not privy to long-range priorities and strategies leaving them feeling reactive and underprepared. Directors feel well supported by one another with the main reason being their lateral communication. Not being siloed makes the difference and allows them to better prioritize their work and foster relationships with their teams. There is an incongruency in some departments’ perception of communication through the echelons of employees. 2.3 MARKET PEERS Focus group participants were asked to name organizations they considered to be both local and regional market peers, who they believe have similar characteristics to the Village. Respondents shared six specific public-sector municipalities. Responses are listed below and were consistent with the approved list of peer organizations from the previously executed compensation only study. Participants named the following municipalities with some frequency as the Village’s biggest competitors in terms of employee compensation and classification: • Aventura • Biscayne Park • Miami Springs • North Miami Beach • Sunny Isle Beach • Surfside 2.4 SUMMARY The feedback received by Evergreen Solutions provided a solid foundation for the development of recommendations for the Village. The willingness of employees to contribute to this dialogue was evident in the number of employees that provided some reasonable observations regarding compensation and classification strengths/weaknesses. These comments were verified and taken into consideration when identifying challenges and formulating recommendations for the Village. Employees were generally enthusiastic when describing their passion for their job and considered working for the Village a very positive experience. Employees pointed out well- defined advantages of working for the Village, which they believe will help attract and retain good employees. Even though employees highlighted several potential areas for improvement, these challenges are not unique to Miami Shores Village and are common to other public-sector municipalities. The employees of the Miami Shores Village take pride in their work, love serving their community, commonly refer to themselves as public servants, and strive to make distinct contributions to their organization and their community. The Evergreen Team used the information gathered from employees throughout the remainder of this study to frame appropriate recommendations for the Village. Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-1 The purpose of this chapter is to provide a statistical analysis of the classification and compensation system in place at the Village at the start of this study. The assessment is divided into the following sections: 3.1 Analysis of Pay Plans 3.2 Summary The analysis represented in this chapter represents a snapshot in time – this chapter is based on employee information collected in September of 2024. Every organization changes continuously, so this chapter is not meant to be a definitive statement on continuing compensation practices at the Village. Rather, this AOCC is meant to represent the conditions that were in place when this study began. The data contained within provide the baseline for analyses through the course of this study but are not sufficient cause for recommendations in isolation. By reviewing employee data, Evergreen gained a better understanding of the structure and methods in place and identified issues for both further review and potential revision. 3.1 ANALYSIS OF PAY PLANS The purpose of analyzing the pay plan used within the Village is to help gain an overview of the compensation philosophy as it existed when the study began. The Village had a system in place that categorized classifications by level and type of work. This system used classification titles to represent varying levels of responsibility, complexity and scope. The Village utilizes a pay plan constructed around classification title with, in most cases, a single salary and incumbent without a defined range. Exhibit 3A displays the Village’s pay plan summarized for ease of comparison. The exhibit provides the name; each classification on the plan; the value of each pay grade at minimum, midpoint and maximum; the range spread for each pay grade – which is a measure of the distance between the minimum and maximum of the grade; and the number of employees per pay grade. For these purposes, ranges are defined by incumbent actual salaries establishing the minimum and maximum of the “range” when possible. For most classifications there is no range associated as there is a single salary assigned to a single or few incumbents. The construction of Village’s pay plan makes traditional methods of analysis utilizing range quartiles, rank and compression and tenure-based progression difficult and are not effective. This chapter will cover a summary of the current plan and a foundation for the study’s recommendation formulation. EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 3 – Assessment of Current Conditions Chapter 3 – Assessment of Current Conditions Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-2 The Village’s pay plan includes 60 occupied classifications occupied by 127 employees. The Village has 52 classifications with a single salary assignment including three classifications with multiple incumbents. The range spreads of the 14 classifications with more than one incumbent with differing salaries fall between 3 – 51 percent. The 24 Police Officers have broadest range of salaries at 51 percent. Chapter 3 – Assessment of Current Conditions Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-3 EXHIBIT 2A PAY PLAN SUMMARY Pay Plan Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum Range Spread Employees General Accreditation Mgr.81,120$ 81,120$ 81,120$ 0%1 General Adult Services Librarian 61,437$ 61,437$ 61,437$ 0%1 General Aquatics Supervisor 90,651$ 90,651$ 90,651$ 0%1 General Assistant Aquatics Supervisor 64,043$ 64,043$ 64,043$ 0%1 General Assistant Director Public Works 112,474$ 112,474$ 112,474$ 0%1 General Assistant Finance Director 121,680$ 121,680$ 121,680$ 0%1 General Assistant Program Supervisor 53,248$ 53,248$ 53,248$ 0%1 General Asst. Village Clerk 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 0%1 General Athletic Program Specialist 43,156$ 43,156$ 43,156$ 0%1 General Building Director 154,496$ 154,496$ 154,496$ 0%1 General Captain 126,406$ 126,406$ 126,406$ 0%4 General Chief Finance Officer 155,624$ 155,624$ 155,624$ 0%1 General Chief of Police 166,178$ 166,178$ 166,178$ 0%1 General Commander 126,406$ 126,406$ 126,406$ 0%1 General Communications Officer 45,760$ 45,760$ 45,760$ 0%3 General Communications Supervisor 59,280$ 59,280$ 59,280$ 0%1 General Crime Analyst II 75,176$ 75,176$ 75,176$ 0%1 General Deputy Village Mgr 151,000$ 151,000$ 151,000$ 0%1 General Digital Evidence Technician 49,927$ 49,927$ 49,927$ 0%1 General Equipment Operator II 45,890$ 45,890$ 45,890$ 0%1 General Equipment Operator III 45,438$ 48,417$ 51,396$ 13%3 General Asst. to Village Manager 113,547$ 113,547$ 113,547$ 0%1 General Executive Assistant 46,800$ 57,133$ 67,467$ 44%3 General Facility Maintenance Technician II 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 0%1 General Finance Clerk 46,800$ 46,800$ 46,800$ 0%1 General Foreman 51,500$ 51,500$ 51,500$ 0%2 General Groundskeeper II 38,585$ 40,727$ 42,869$ 11%2 General HR Director 140,000$ 140,000$ 140,000$ 0%1 General IT Manager 112,580$ 112,580$ 112,580$ 0%1 General IT Technician 43,307$ 43,307$ 43,307$ 0%1 General Lead Mechanic 57,000$ 57,000$ 57,000$ 0%1 General Lead Worker 46,747$ 46,747$ 46,747$ 0%1 General Library Assistant II 33,280$ 33,280$ 33,280$ 0%1 General Library Director 114,390$ 114,390$ 114,390$ 0%1 General Lifeguard II 40,430$ 40,941$ 41,452$ 3%2 General Maintenance Worker I 31,643$ 32,118$ 32,592$ 3%2 General Maintenance Worker II 37,642$ 40,052$ 42,462$ 13%8 General Mechanic 44,117$ 48,058$ 52,000$ 18%2 General Neighborhood Services Manager 78,000$ 78,000$ 78,000$ 0%1 General Neighborhood Services Officer 52,000$ 52,000$ 52,000$ 0%1 General Operations Manager 107,817$ 107,817$ 107,817$ 0%1 General Parks & Recreation Assistant Director 92,176$ 92,176$ 92,176$ 0%1 General Parks & Recreation Director 119,603$ 119,603$ 119,603$ 0%1 General Parks & Recreation Superintendent 90,651$ 90,651$ 90,651$ 0%1 General Parks & Streets Supervisor 87,609$ 87,609$ 87,609$ 0%1 General Permit Clerk 45,760$ 46,800$ 47,840$ 5%2 General Permit Clerk II 52,000$ 52,000$ 52,000$ 0%1 General Permit Manager 72,800$ 72,800$ 72,800$ 0%1 General Planner I 60,000$ 60,000$ 60,000$ 0%1 General Police Detective 90,626$ 97,770$ 104,915$ 16%2 General Police Officer 66,456$ 83,470$ 100,485$ 51% 24 General Police Sergeant 95,160$ 105,414$ 115,669$ 22%7 General Program Event Specialist 42,334$ 42,334$ 42,334$ 0%1 General Program Specialist 41,101$ 41,101$ 41,101$ 0%1 General Property, Evidence & Records Technician 53,563$ 53,563$ 53,563$ 0%1 General Public Right-of-way Foreman 58,124$ 58,124$ 58,124$ 0%1 General Purchasing Agent 74,820$ 74,820$ 74,820$ 0%1 General Recreation Manager II 58,240$ 58,240$ 58,240$ 0%1 General Recycling Truck Driver 45,427$ 45,427$ 45,427$ 0%1 General Small Equipment Service Technician 39,656$ 39,656$ 39,656$ 0%1 General Solid Waste Collector 37,652$ 40,325$ 42,998$ 14%3 General Solid Waste Truck Driver 45,427$ 54,700$ 63,972$ 41%7 General Tree Trimmer 53,388$ 59,998$ 66,607$ 25%2 General Village Clerk 123,468$ 123,468$ 123,468$ 0%1 General Village Manager 208,364$ 208,364$ 208,364$ 0%1 General Youth Services Librarian 61,437$ 61,437$ 61,437$ 0%1 Chapter 3 – Assessment of Current Conditions Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-4 Comparing the summary data in Exhibit 3A to best practices, several observations can be made regarding the Village pay plan. Based on the analysis of the pay plan, the following facts can be observed: • Range spreads⎯generally set between 50-70 percent⎯are much narrower than you would typically see in the market today. • The number of employees on each classification grade is widely varied. Most only have a single incumbent occupying the grade, while several contain more than five employees. • The minimum annual pay offered to any Village employee is $31,643 while the maximum salary of any pay grade is $208,364. 3.2 SUMMARY The Village utilizes classification titles and their tasks, responsibilities, complexity and scope to assign salaries. Individual employee competencies are considered when assigning equitable salaries where there is more than one incumbent in the same classification. This provides a customized approach to allow the Village to adjust each classification much or as little as needed to fit the changing needs of the Village and market. As this practice was practical at a time, the Village and the organization have expanded requiring a more exacting method for salary assignment, considering internal and external equities. Village residents have greater expectations in services provided, demanding proficient and professional employees to meet these demands. Some observations made with respect to the Village’s compensation system in place at the beginning of the study are below. • Range spread, generally recommended to be between 50-70 percent, varies across several grades. The Village’s plan has range spreads varying from 0.0 percent up to 51 percent. These ranges are based on actual salaries in each classification. • Employee progression projections cannot be determined where ranges are absent. • Salary compression cannot be determined where direct report / supervisor relationships are not clearly established. This analysis acts as a starting point for development of recommendations in subsequent chapters of this report. Paired with market data, Evergreen can make recommendations that will ensure that the Village compensation system is structurally sound in terms of best practice, competitive with the market, and treats all employees equitably moving forward. Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-1 ` The purpose of the market summary chapter is to benchmark the Village’s compensation practices against that of its market peers; to establish how competitive the Village is with the market. To complete this market study, Evergreen compared pay ranges of select benchmark positions that the Village possesses against the compensation of positions performing those same duties within peer organizations. By aggregating the differences in pay ranges across all the positions, a reasonable determination is made as to the Village’s competitive position within the market. It is important to note that individual salaries are not analyzed in this methodology, since individual compensation can be affected by several variables such as experience and job performance. For this reason, Evergreen looked at average pay ranges across the entire classification to make the most accurate comparison. The results of this market study should be considered reflective of the current state of the market at the time of this study; however, market conditions can change rapidly. Consequently, it is necessary to perform market surveys of peer organizations at regular intervals for an organization to consistently monitor its position within the market. Furthermore, the market results detailed in this chapter provide a foundation for understanding the Village’s overall structural standing to the market, and the rates reflected in this chapter, while an important factor, are not the sole determinant for how classifications were placed into the proposed salary ranges outlined in Chapter 5. Evergreen conducted a comprehensive market salary survey for the Village, which included soliciting 21 target peer organizations (19 municipalities and two counties) for 68 benchmark positions. Of the 21 total organizations contacted, 21 responded and provided data for the benchmark positions. Target peers were selected based on several factors, including geographic proximity, resource level, job overlap, and size. Target organizations were also identified for their competition to the Village for employee recruitment and retention efforts. The list of targets that provided data for the purpose of this study is included in Exhibit 4A. EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 4 – Market Summary Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-2 EXHIBIT 4A RESPONDENT MARKET PEERS The data collected for the market summary was adjusted relative to the Village based on cost- of-living. For all organizations that fell outside the Village’s immediate region, a cost-of-living adjustment was applied to the reported pay ranges to ensure a market average was attained in terms of the spending power an employee would have in the Village’s local area. Evergreen utilizes cost-of-living index information from the Council for Community and Economic Research. The cost-of-living index figures for the Village and each of the respondent market peers are in Exhibit 4B. Respondent Organizations Aventura, FL Bay Harbor Islands, FL Biscayne Park, FL Doral, FL Hallandale Beach, FL Homestead, FL Key Biscayne, FL City of Miami, FL Coral Gables, FL Miami Springs, FL North Miami Beach, FL North Miami , FL Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, FL Palmetto Bay, FL Pinecrest, FL South Miami, FL Sunny Isles Beach, FL Surfside, FL West Miami, FL Broward County, FL Miami-Dade County, FL Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-3 EXHIBIT 4B RESPONDENTS WITH COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENTS 4.1 MARKET DATA The results of the market study are displayed in Exhibit 4C, which includes the benchmark job titles and the market average salaries for each position at the minimum, midpoint, and maximum points of the pay ranges. For this comparison and its correlation to the Village’s pay plan, the market midpoint is the most germane data point since most of the Village’s classifications do not have salary ranges. This will enable recommendations to establish salary ranges. Also included within the exhibit are the percentage differentials of the Village’s pay ranges at each respective point, relative to the market average pay. A positive percent differential is indicative of the Village’s pay range exceeding that of the average of its market peers; alternatively, a negative percent differential indicates the Village’s compensation for a given position lagging behind the average of its peers. For those classifications where no differential is shown, this is due to the Village not possessing a pay range for comparison to the market. The exhibit also includes the average pay range for the market respondents for each position, as well as how many responses each benchmark received. Organization Cost of Living Miami Shores, FL 109.1 Aventura, Florida 109.1 Bay Harbor Islands, FL 109.1 Biscayne Park, FL 109.1 Doral, FL 109.1 Hallandale Beach, FL 109.1 Homestead, FL 109.1 Key Biscayne, FL 109.1 City of Miami, FL 109.1 Coral Gables, FL 109.3 Miami Springs, FL 109.1 North Miami Beach, FL 109.1 North Miami , FL 109.1 Lauderdale-by-the-Sea, FL 109.1 Palmetto Bay, FL 109.1 Pinecrest, FL 109.1 South Miami, FL 109.1 Sunny Isles Beach, FL 109.1 Surfside, FL 109.1 West Miami, FL 109.1 Broward County, FL 109.3 Miami-Dade County, FL 109.1 Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-4 While all benchmarks are included in the survey, not every peer organization possesses an appropriate match. Consequently, the benchmarks receive varying levels of response. For this study, all positions that received fewer than five matches from market peers were not considered in establishing the Village’s competitive position. The rationale behind these positions being excluded is that insufficient response can lead to unreliable averages that may skew the aggregated data, blurring the reality of the Village’s actual position in the market. Additionally, any positions within the Village that do not contain pay ranges cannot be directly compared to the market values. Of the 68 positions surveyed, 54 met the criteria for inclusion by achieving at least five responses. Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-5 EXHIBIT 4C MARKET SURVEY RESULTS Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 1 Accreditation Manager $62,210.69 23.3% $79,984.95 1.4% $97,759.20 -20.5% 57.1% 7.0 2 Adult Services Librarian $43,902.49 28.5% $55,727.74 9.3% $67,552.98 -10.0% 53.9% 4.0 3 Aquatics Supervisor $60,845.00 32.9% $81,191.02 10.4% $101,537.05 -12.0% 66.9% 6.0 4 Assistant Finance Director $98,852.84 18.8% $136,380.17 -12.1% $170,322.29 -40.0% 72.3% 8.0 5 Assistant Program Supervisor -REC $54,960.22 -3.2% $71,267.32 -33.8% $87,574.43 -64.5% 59.3% 5.0 6 Asst. Village Clerk $82,901.17 -65.8% $111,244.84 -122.5% $137,302.32 -174.6% 65.6% 5.0 7 Athletic Program Specialist $44,978.99 -4.2% $55,915.74 -29.6% $68,040.98 -57.7% 51.3% 6.0 8 Building Director $115,090.88 25.5% $152,770.12 1.1% $190,449.36 -23.3% 65.5% 9.0 9 Captain $108,624.27 14.1% $135,977.31 -7.6% $163,330.35 -29.2% 50.4% 6.0 10 Chief Finance Officer $129,794.00 16.6% $169,623.12 -9.0% $209,452.23 -34.6% 61.4% 9.0 11 Chief of Police $146,210.58 12.0% $185,143.75 -11.4% $217,498.25 -30.9% 48.8% 8.0 12 Commander $137,375.23 -8.7% $158,727.50 -25.6% $180,079.77 -42.5% 31.1% 2.0 13 Communications Officer -PD $46,490.24 -1.6% $60,602.18 -29.8% $74,714.13 -57.0% 60.7% 9.0 14 Communications Supervisor - PD $60,792.17 -2.6% $83,167.56 -40.3% $102,978.75 -73.7% 69.4% 6.0 15 Crime Analyst II $52,550.63 30.1% $69,875.66 7.1% $86,437.44 -15.0% 64.5% 7.0 16 Deputy Village Mgr $127,090.81 15.8% $172,352.06 -14.1% $215,628.79 -42.8% 69.7% 7.0 17 Digital Evidence Technician -PD $42,245.00 15.4% $64,466.57 -29.1% $85,375.36 -71.0% 102.1% 7.0 18 Equipment Operator II $42,606.78 7.2% $57,012.58 -24.2% $71,418.38 -55.6% 67.6% 5.0 19 Equipment Operator III $44,898.74 1.2% $59,819.71 -23.6% $74,740.67 -45.4% 66.5% 7.0 20 Asst. to Village Manager $71,428.20 37.1% $99,771.20 12.1% $125,182.06 -10.2% 75.3% 9.0 21 Executive Assistant $52,186.96 -11.5% $67,338.09 -17.9% $81,646.05 -21.0% 56.5% 6.0 22 Facility Maintenance Technician I $40,521.53 - $54,468.03 - $67,888.11 - 67.5% 9.0 23 Facility Maintenance Technician II $41,106.38 17.8%- -- -- 1.0 24 Finance Clerk $42,363.37 9.5% $58,701.96 -25.4% $73,708.05 -57.5% 74.0% 7.0 25 Foreman $54,063.39 -5.0% $70,093.36 -36.1% $86,123.32 -67.2% 59.3% 5.0 26 Groundskeeper II $35,138.99 8.9% $46,154.16 -13.3% $57,169.33 -33.4% 62.7% 8.0 27 HR Director $109,877.81 21.5% $147,598.77 -5.4% $185,319.73 -32.4% 68.7% 8.0 28 IT Director $123,403.37 - $167,104.29 - $210,805.21 - 70.8% 6.0 29 IT Manager $87,723.12 22.1% $115,159.83 -2.3% $142,596.54 -26.7% 62.5% 8.0 30 IT Technician $51,949.11 -20.0% $66,723.76 -54.1% $81,056.42 -87.2% 56.0% 10.0 31 Lead Mechanic $54,040.01 5.2% $70,503.37 -23.7% $86,966.73 -52.6% 60.9% 5.0 32 Lead Worker $43,726.27 6.5% $61,180.88 -30.9% $77,344.72 -65.5% 76.9% 5.0 33 Library Assistant II $32,351.15 2.8% $40,803.76 -22.6% $49,256.38 -48.0% 52.3% 4.0 34 Library Director $78,500.74 31.4% $112,327.81 1.8% $146,154.89 -27.8% 86.2% 3.0 35 Lifeguard II $36,991.51 8.5% $46,135.11 -12.7% $55,842.26 -34.7% 51.0% 7.0 36 Maintenance Worker I -PW $34,276.28 -8.3% $43,812.85 -36.4% $53,705.01 -64.8% 56.7% 13.0 37 Maintenance Worker II - REC $37,968.69 -3.9% $47,907.30 -21.3% $57,845.91 -36.2% 52.4% 8.0 38 Mechanic $47,595.31 -7.9% $62,334.99 -29.7% $77,074.67 -48.2% 61.9% 6.0 39 Neighborhood Services Director $119,190.02 - $155,541.74 - $191,893.45 - 61.0% 5.0 40 Neighborhood Services Manager $74,582.80 4.4% $95,817.69 -22.8% $117,052.58 -50.1% 56.9% 5.0 41 Neighborhood Services Officer $47,323.96 9.0% $59,486.74 -14.4% $72,445.64 -39.3% 53.1% 11.0 42 Operations Manager $74,276.83 31.1% $96,120.32 10.8% $117,963.82 -9.4% 58.8% 8.0 43 Parks & Recreation Assistant Director $100,292.82 -8.8% $138,718.00 -50.5% $173,352.27 -88.1% 72.9% 8.0 44 Parks & Recreation Director $122,118.62 -2.1% $162,729.34 -36.1% $203,340.06 -70.0% 66.5% 8.0 45 Parks & Recreation Superintendent $70,131.15 22.6% $94,876.17 -4.7% $117,219.97 -29.3% 67.1% 9.0 46 Parks & Streets Supervisor $51,254.60 41.5% $70,048.38 20.0% $87,150.79 0.5% 70.0% 7.0 47 Permit Clerk $42,342.73 7.5% $56,442.24 -20.6% $69,744.32 -45.8% 64.7% 11.0 48 Permit Manager $69,301.58 4.8% $92,390.00 -26.9% $115,478.41 -58.6% 66.6% 7.0 49 Planner I $64,255.67 -7.1% $83,632.06 -39.4% $103,008.44 -71.7% 60.3% 8.0 50 Planner Technician $43,245.99 - $55,426.55 - $67,607.12 - 56.3% 6.0 51 Police Officer $63,882.72 3.9% $79,216.25 5.1% $94,290.60 6.2% 47.6% 11.0 52 Police Sergeant $82,964.39 12.8% $101,373.18 3.8% $119,781.98 -3.6% 44.4% 8.0 53 Program Specialist $44,261.28 -7.7% $59,733.68 -45.3% $74,389.22 -81.0% 68.1% 8.0 54 Project Manager- PW $84,015.29 - $109,998.91 - $135,982.52 - 61.9% 8.0 55 Property, Evidence & Records Technician $35,567.63 33.6% $51,203.23 4.4% $66,638.94 -24.4% 87.4% 7.0 56 Public Right-of-way Foreman $55,771.11 4.0% $80,492.73 -38.5% $102,281.40 -76.0% 83.4% 6.0 57 Public Works Director $122,024.94 -8.5% $160,473.89 -42.7% $195,567.69 -73.9% 60.3% 11.0 58 Purchasing Agent $57,597.79 23.0% $78,829.50 -5.4% $97,020.12 -29.7% 68.5% 8.0 59 Recreation Manager II $62,153.97 -6.7% $81,446.07 -39.8% $100,738.17 -73.0% 62.1% 7.0 60 School Resource Officer $65,594.88 - $68,789.76 - $68,789.76 - 4.9% 2.0 61 Small Equipment Service Technician $39,414.77 0.6% $50,309.73 -26.9% $61,204.69 -54.3% 55.3% 6.0 62 Solid Waste Collector $33,662.96 10.6% $43,204.77 -7.1% $52,746.58 -22.7% 56.7% 3.0 63 Solid Waste Truck Driver $41,945.10 7.7% $53,965.77 1.3% $65,986.44 -3.1% 57.3% 5.0 64 Systems Administrator $78,969.38 - $99,063.07 - $119,156.76 - 50.9% 9.0 65 Tree Trimmer $34,675.12 35.1% $45,460.98 24.2% $56,246.85 15.6% 62.2% 8.0 66 Village Clerk $87,480.57 29.1% $112,750.00 8.7% $135,800.00 -10.0% 55.2% 6.0 67 Village Manager $197,028.92 5.4% $250,860.30 -20.4% $304,500.00 -46.1% 54.5% 5.0 68 Youth Services Librarian $42,855.20 30.2% $54,423.44 11.4% $65,991.68 -7.4% 54.0% 4.0 Overall Average 9.0%-17.5%-42.6%61.6%6.9 Outliers Removed*8.0%-18.9%-44.5%63.1%7.4 ID Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range # Resp.Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-6 4.2 SALARY SURVEY RESULTS As noted previously, for survey results the most germane market position to analyze is the Market Midpoints. This is due to the Village utilizing mostly single salary classifications without ranges. While the midpoint is most relevant for direct comparison, the minimums and maximums remain important markers for the establishment of ranges in the Village as part of the recommendations outlined in Chapter 5. Market Minimums It is important to assess where an organization is relative to its market minimum salaries, as they are the beginning salaries of employees with minimal qualifications for a given position. Organizations that are significantly below market may experience recruitment challenges with entry-level employees. As seen in Exhibit 4C, the Village is currently 8.0 percent above the market average minimum, when considering positions with sufficient responses. The Village’s benchmark positions ranged from 65.8 percent below to 41.5 percent above at the market minimum. The following points are regarding the Village’s position relative to the market average minimum: • Of these 54 positions, 17 were below market, averaging 10.3 percent below. These 17 classifications represent roughly 31.5 percent of the surveyed positions that met the criteria for inclusion. • This analysis compares the current salaries of the Village to the ranges found in the market. • Of the 17 positions below market, three were more than 10 percent below the average market minimum. These positions are displayed in Exhibit 4D. EXHIBIT 4D CLASSIFICATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT BELOW THE MINIMUM • Of these 54 positions, 37 were above market, averaging 16.4 percent above. These 37 classifications represent roughly 68.5 percent of the surveyed positions that met the criteria for inclusion. • Of the 37 positions above market, 21 were more than 10 percent above the average market minimum. These positions are displayed in Exhibit 4E. Classification % Diff Asst. Village Clerk -65.8% IT Technician -20.0% Executive Assistant -11.5% Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-7 EXHIBIT 4E CLASSIFICATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT ABOVE THE MINIMUM Market Midpoints The market midpoint is exceptionally important to analyze, as it is often considered the closest estimation of market average compensation. As seen in Exhibit 4C, the Village is currently 18.9 percent below the market average midpoint, when considering positions with sufficient responses. The Village’s benchmark positions ranged from 122.5 percent below to 24.2 percent above at the market midpoint. The following points are regarding the Village’s position relative to the market average midpoint: •Of these 54 positions, 41 were below market, averaging 27.6 percent below. These 41 classifications represent roughly 75.9 percent of the surveyed positions that met the criteria for inclusion. •This analysis compares the current salaries of the Village to the ranges found in the market. •Of the 41 positions below market, 35 were more than 10 percent below the average market minimum. These positions are displayed in Exhibit 4F. Classification % Diff Parks & Streets Supervisor 41.5% Asst. to Village Manager 37.1% Tree Trimmer 35.1% Property, Evidence & Records Technician 33.6% Aquatics Supervisor 32.9% Operations Manager 31.1% Crime Analyst II 30.1% Village Clerk 29.1% Building Director 25.5% Accreditation Manager 23.3% Purchasing Agent 23.0% Parks & Recreation Superintendent 22.6% IT Manager 22.1% HR Director 21.5% Assistant Finance Director 18.8% Chief Finance Officer 16.6% Deputy Village Mgr 15.8% Digital Evidence Technician -PD 15.4% Captain 14.1% Police Sergeant 12.8% Chief of Police 12.0% Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-8 EXHIBIT 4F CLASSIFICATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT BELOW THE MIDPOINT Classification % Diff Asst. Village Clerk -122.5% IT Technician -54.1% Parks & Recreation Assistant Director -50.5% Program Specialist -45.3% Public Works Director -42.7% Communications Supervisor - PD -40.3% Recreation Manager II -39.8% Planner I -39.4% Public Right-of-way Foreman -38.5% Maintenance Worker I -PW -36.4% Foreman -36.1% Parks & Recreation Director -36.1% Assistant Program Supervisor -REC -33.8% Lead Worker -30.9% Communications Officer -PD -29.8% Mechanic -29.7% Athletic Program Specialist -29.6% Digital Evidence Technician -PD -29.1% Permit Manager -26.9% Small Equipment Service Technician -26.9% Finance Clerk -25.4% Equipment Operator II -24.2% Lead Mechanic -23.7% Equipment Operator III -23.6% Neighborhood Services Manager -22.8% Maintenance Worker II - REC -21.3% Permit Clerk -20.6% Village Manager -20.4% Executive Assistant -17.9% Neighborhood Services Officer -14.4% Deputy Village Mgr -14.1% Groundskeeper II -13.3% Lifeguard II -12.7% Assistant Finance Director -12.1% Chief of Police -11.4% Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-9 •Of these 54 positions, 13 were above market, averaging 8.5 percent above. These 13 classifications represent roughly 24.1 percent of the surveyed positions that met the criteria for inclusion. •This analysis compares the current salaries of the Village to the ranges found in the market. •Of the 13 positions above market, five were more than 10 percent above the average market midpoint. These positions are displayed in Exhibit 4G. EXHIBIT 4G CLASSIFICATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT ABOVE THE MIDPOINT Market Maximums The pay range maximum averages, and how they compare to the Village’s, are also detailed in Exhibit 4C. As seen in Exhibit 4C, the Village is currently 44.5 percent below the market average maximum, when considering positions with sufficient responses. The Village’s benchmark positions ranged from 174.6 percent below to 15.6 percent above at the market maximum. The following points are regarding the Village’s position relative to the market average maximum: •Of these 54 positions, 51 were below market, averaging 47.5 percent below. These 51 classifications represent roughly 5.6 percent of the surveyed positions that met the criteria for inclusion. •Of the 51 positions below market, 47 were more than 10 percent below the average market maximum. These positions are displayed in Exhibit 4H. Classification % Diff Tree Trimmer 24.2% Parks & Streets Supervisor 20.0% Asst. to Village Manager 12.1% Operations Manager 10.8% Aquatics Supervisor 10.4% Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-10 EXHIBIT 4H CLASSIFICATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT BELOW THE MAXIMUM Classification % Diff Asst. Village Clerk -174.6% Parks & Recreation Assistant Director -88.1% IT Technician -87.2% Program Specialist -81.0% Public Right-of-way Foreman -76.0% Public Works Director -73.9% Communications Supervisor - PD -73.7% Recreation Manager II -73.0% Planner I -71.7% Digital Evidence Technician -PD -71.0% Parks & Recreation Director -70.0% Foreman -67.2% Lead Worker -65.5% Maintenance Worker I -PW -64.8% Assistant Program Supervisor -REC -64.5% Permit Manager -58.6% Athletic Program Specialist -57.7% Finance Clerk -57.5% Communications Officer -PD -57.0% Equipment Operator II -55.6% Small Equipment Service Technician -54.3% Lead Mechanic -52.6% Neighborhood Services Manager -50.1% Mechanic -48.2% Village Manager -46.1% Permit Clerk -45.8% Equipment Operator III -45.4% Deputy Village Mgr -42.8% Assistant Finance Director -40.0% Neighborhood Services Officer -39.3% Maintenance Worker II - REC -36.2% Lifeguard II -34.7% Chief Finance Officer -34.6% Groundskeeper II -33.4% HR Director -32.4% Chief of Police -30.9% Purchasing Agent -29.7% Parks & Recreation Superintendent -29.3% Captain -29.2% IT Manager -26.7% Property, Evidence & Records Technician -24.4% Building Director -23.3% Executive Assistant -21.0% Accreditation Manager -20.5% Crime Analyst II -15.0% Aquatics Supervisor -12.0% Asst. to Village Manager -10.2% Chapter 4 – Market Summary Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-11 •Of these 54 positions, three were above market, averaging 7.4 percent above. These three classifications represent roughly 5.6 percent of the surveyed positions that met the criteria for inclusion. •This analysis compares the current salaries of the Village to the ranges found in the market. •Of the three positions above market, one was more than 10 percent above the average market maximum. These positions are displayed in Exhibit 4I. EXHIBIT 4I CLASSIFICATIONS MORE THAN 10 PERCENT ABOVE THE MAXIMUM 4.3 SALARY SURVEY CONCLUSION In this analysis individual actual salaries are compared to the average ranges provided by surveyed market peers. The standing of individual classifications’ pay range relative to the market should not be considered a definitive assessment of actual employee salaries being similarly above or below the market; however, such differentials can, in part, explain symptomatic issues with recruitment and retention of employees. This data analysis provides foundational reference when establishing grades and ranges for the Village to implement in the recommendations of this study. The main summary points of the market study are as follows: •The Village’s pay ranges are approximately 8.0 percent above the market minimum. •The Village’s pay ranges are approximately 18.9 percent below the market midpoint. •The Village’s pay ranges are approximately 44.5 percent below the market maximum. •The Village’s pay range spread is approximately 4.5 percent, while its peers’ pay range spread is 61.6 percent. This is an indication of the single salary classification system being utilized in the Village compared to broader ranges utilized by surveyed market peers. This is also evident in the broad variance in differentials at each point of comparison, minimum, midpoint and maximums. The results of the market summary chapter are pivotal in the formulation of recommendations by Evergreen Solutions. By establishing the Village’s market position relative to its peers, Evergreen is better able to propose recommendations that enable the Village to occupy its desired competitive position. Classification % Diff Tree Trimmer 15.6% Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-1 After reviewing the information provided in the preceding sections of this report, Evergreen developed recommendations to improve the Village’s current compensation and classification system. The recommendations, as well as the findings that led to each recommendation, are discussed in detail in this section. The recommendations are organized into three sections: classification, compensation, and administration of the system. 5.1 CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS A well-structured classification system and associated policies and procedures is critical to aligning an organization’s workforce with its commitment to effectively and efficiently deliver services. Accurate job titles and descriptions ensure internal equity and support meaningful comparisons with peer organizations. Evergreen Solutions conducted a classification analysis for the Village to assess the accuracy and consistency of existing roles. Using data gathered through the Job Assessment Tool (JAT), completed by employees and validated by supervisors, Evergreen evaluated the nature and scope of work across positions. This analysis identified overly broad or narrow titles, outdated job descriptions, and inconsistencies across departments. Recommendations were developed based on these findings and informed by human resources best practices. FINDING The Village’s current classification system is characterized by distinct titles, many of which reflect similar duties and responsibilities. This over-classification has resulted from decentralized practices, where departments independently created positions to meet immediate needs, without a standardized, organization-wide approach. Additionally, some classification tiers appear to have been introduced to provide pay increases for tenured or high-performing employees, rather than through a structured salary range or compensation strategy. The system also lacks consistency in the application of titling conventions, further contributing to misalignment and inefficiencies across the organization. Additionally, several of the Village’s classifications require some modification to better describe the work being performed. Current job descriptions and corresponding Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemption status require review, updates and revisions. RECOMMENDATION 1: Adopt a new classification system for all employees. Evergreen has developed a new proposed classification system for the Village’s consideration. The foundation for these recommendations was the work performed by employees in these classifications as described in their JATs and best practices among the Village’s peers. By organizing highly similar work performed by different positions under a singular title, the EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 5 - Recommendations Chapter 5 - Recommendations Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-2 Village will have a more organized system of grouping types of work performed and better be able to track and ensure internal equity between positions within the Village. RECOMMENDATION 2: Update existing class description to reflect the new classification system and review all updated descriptions for FLSA status. As part of the recommended title changes, Evergreen will provide the Village with updated classification descriptions to ensure alignment with the actual duties performed by employees. These descriptions will be delivered separately. Once finalized and approved, Evergreen will also recommend updated FLSA designations based on the revised job content. Exhibit 5A displays the recommended changes to FLSA status. EXIBHIT 5A 5.2 COMPENSATION RECOMMENDATIONS The compensation analysis consisted of two parts: an external market assessment and an internal equity assessment. During the external market assessment, the Village’s compensation for selected benchmark classifications was compared to average compensation offered in the market the Village competes for employees in. The external assessment consisted of comparing the Village against its peer organizations within its market and revealed that the Village is currently lagging the market. To what extent was somewhat difficult to determine since the Village primarily uses a single salary model not a range, as their peers employ. During the internal equity assessment, consideration of the relationships between and the type of work being performed by the Village’s employees in their classifications was reviewed and analyzed. Specifically, a composite score was assigned to each of the Village’s classifications that quantified the classification’s level of five separate compensatory factors. The level for each factor was determined based on responses to the JAT. Additional steps were taken to collaborate with the Village department directors and executive leaders to consider specific hierarchical placement and internal relationships. This measure was to ensure that Evergreen was not operating in a vacuum and recommendations are well suited to the Village. FINDING The Village does not currently maintain an organized and defined overall pay plan, Evergreen found that the use of individual salary assignments can be arbitrary. Furthermore, the plan lacked uniformity and proportionality in classifications’ relation to one another and progress Department Classification Recommended Title Current FLSA Evergreen Proposed FLSA Parks & Recreation Recreation Manager I RECREATION MANAGER I NE E Police Department Crime Analyst II RESEARCH & INTELLIGENCE MANAGER E NE Chapter 5 - Recommendations Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-3 from one to the next. The titling conventions of the classifications and their correlation to salaries were not intuitive in their design. RECOMMENDATION 3: Adopt a new, market responsive compensation structure and assign all positions to it equitably. Evergreen has developed a new pay plan for the Village’s consideration. The new structure consists of 22 unique pay grades, each with a range spread of 60 percent between the minimum and the maximum of the range. Furthermore, the midpoint progression between grades is between 8 percent and 10 percent. The midpoint progressions widen to accommodate broadening levels of complexity in the more senior classifications. The details of the proposed plan are in Exhibit 5B. EXHIBIT 5B PROPOSED PAY PLAN Implementation of the new compensation structure requires two steps. First, all positions were assigned to an appropriate pay grade within the plan. Pay grades were determined through the following factors: the results of the JAT analysis, the results of the market study, as well as consideration for both existing and newly created internal relationships between Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum Range Spread Midpoint Progression 101 34,320.00$ 44,616.00$ 54,912.00$ 60.0% - 102 37,065.60$ 48,185.28$ 59,304.96$ 60.0% 8.0% 103 40,030.85$ 52,040.10$ 64,049.36$ 60.0% 8.0% 104 43,233.32$ 56,203.31$ 69,173.31$ 60.0% 8.0% 105 46,691.98$ 60,699.58$ 74,707.17$ 60.0% 8.0% 106 50,427.34$ 65,555.54$ 80,683.74$ 60.0% 8.0% 107 54,461.53$ 70,799.98$ 87,138.44$ 60.0% 8.0% 108 58,818.45$ 76,463.98$ 94,109.52$ 60.0% 8.0% 109 63,523.92$ 82,581.10$ 101,638.28$ 60.0% 8.0% 110 68,605.84$ 89,187.59$ 109,769.34$ 60.0% 8.0% 111 75,466.42$ 98,106.35$ 120,746.28$ 60.0% 10.0% 112 83,013.06$ 107,916.98$ 132,820.90$ 60.0% 10.0% 113 91,314.37$ 118,708.68$ 146,102.99$ 60.0% 10.0% 114 100,445.81$ 130,579.55$ 160,713.29$ 60.0% 10.0% 115 110,490.39$ 143,637.51$ 176,784.62$ 60.0% 10.0% 116 121,539.43$ 158,001.26$ 194,463.09$ 60.0% 10.0% 117 133,693.37$ 173,801.38$ 213,909.39$ 60.0% 10.0% 118 147,062.71$ 191,181.52$ 235,300.33$ 60.0% 10.0% 119 161,768.98$ 210,299.67$ 258,830.37$ 60.0% 10.0% 120 177,945.88$ 231,329.64$ 284,713.40$ 60.0% 10.0% 121 195,740.46$ 254,462.60$ 313,184.74$ 60.0% 10.0% UNG --- - - Chapter 5 - Recommendations Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-4 classifications and inputs from Village leadership. The market results discussed in Chapter 4 were not the sole criteria for the proposed pay ranges. RECOMMENDATION 4: Evergreen recommends the Village adopt a methodology to transition employee salaries into the proposed pay plan that aligns with its established compensation philosophy and meets the available financial resources of the organization. The second step of implementing the proposed structure is to transition employee salaries into their new recommended pay ranges. Evergreens recommendation is outlined below. The 30-Year Hybrid Parity offers the Village the broadest benefit based on organizational goals. Compression in grade and incorporating value in the organization and in classification were outlined as study objectives. 30-Year Hybrid Parity This option consists of placing employees in their proposed pay ranges based on how long employees have been with the organization. The parity effectively divides the pay range by 30, and places employees within their range based on their class time. Additionally, employees are given partial credit for any time they have spent at the organization outside of their current classification at half credit. For example, an employee who has been in their classification for five years, but had 25 years with the organization, would be placed at the midpoint of the range, due to their receiving five years of class time at straight credit, and the remaining 20 years of experience at half credit, for a total of 15 years of credit. If an employee’s current salary is higher than their hybrid parity projected salary, no adjustment is made, and as such no salaries are decreased as part of this adjustment. This methodology seeks to re-align employee salaries based on years in classification, while also giving credit for additional organizational experience, and can space out compressed employee salaries along the range based on this factor. The estimated cost for this adjustment is $439,663.15 affecting a total of 87 employees. 5.3 COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION Any organization’s compensation and classification system will need periodic maintenance. The recommendations provided in this chapter were developed based on conditions at the time the study was conducted. Without proper upkeep of the system, the potential for recruitment and retention issues may increase as the compensation and classification system becomes dated and less competitive. RECOMMENDATION 5: Conduct small-scale salary surveys as needed to assess the market competitiveness of hard-to-fill classifications and/or classifications with retention issues and adjust pay grade assignments if necessary. While it is unlikely that the pay plan will need to be adjusted for several years, a small number of classifications’ pay grades may need to be reassigned more frequently. If one or more classifications are exhibiting high turnover or are having difficulty with recruitment, the Village should collect salary range data from peer organizations to determine whether an adjustment is needed for the pay grade of the classification(s). Chapter 5 - Recommendations Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-5 RECOMMENDATION 6: Conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation study every three to five years. While small-scale salary surveys can improve the market position of specific classifications, it is recommended that a full classification and compensation study be conducted every three to five years to preserve both internal and external equity for the Village. Changes to classification and compensation do occur, and while the increments of change may seem minor, they can compound over time. A failure to react to these changes quickly has the potential to place the Village in a poor position for recruiting and retaining quality employees. While the previous two recommendations intend to maintain the competitiveness over time of the classification and compensation structure, it is also necessary to establish procedures for determining equitable pay practices for individual employees. RECOMMENDATION 7: Revise and/or establish policies and practices for moving employees’ salaries through the pay plan, including procedures for determining the salaries of newly hired employees and employees who have been promoted, demoted, or transferred to a different classification. The method of moving salaries through the pay plan and setting new salaries for new hires, promotions, demotions, and transfers depends largely on an organization’s compensation philosophy. However, it is important for the Village to have established guidelines for each of these situations, and that they are followed consistently for all employees. Common practices for progressing and establishing employee salaries are outlined below. Salary Progression Evergreen recommends Village enact the second phase of implementing the new pay plan which would involve a one-time salary adjustment for employees to ensure they are placed in the proper percentile of their salary range. While this major adjustment should be performed when the Village has the financial resources to do so, the Village should continue to adjust salaries annually when financially feasible. Based on the feedback from employees and Village leadership, Evergreen recommends that the basis of salary adjustment in the future be done at three distinct levels. • Structural: Annual adjustment of the ranges should be made with the aim of pacing changes in the cost of living. Evergreen recommends the Village tie the annual compensation structure movement to the local change in the Consumer-Price-Index (CPI) or wage inflation figures. This annual adjustment will ensure the Village’s pay ranges do not rapidly fall out of line with that of its peers; however, when conducting the small-scale surveys referenced above, the Village should also collect pay plan movement and anticipated movement from its peers to gauge if market movement is keeping pace with CPI movement. • Classification: As a result of the market surveys, the Village may identify classifications or job families that are experiencing considerable market movement and as a result, reassignment of the pay grades should be considered when this occurs. Alternatively, if the Village identifies classifications that have become hard to recruit and retain, pay Chapter 5 - Recommendations Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-6 grade reassignment should also be considered to ensure the Village is competitive for both recruiting new talent and retaining existing employees. • Individual: To tie into the adjustment of the structure, Evergreen recommends the Village adjust employee salaries annually for Cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). An additional adjustment to maintain adherence to the implementation compensation methodology should be done for all employees, to allow for employee progression into the range. All employee salaries are recommended to remain in the range for their classification. Any employee at the maximum of their range would only receive increases through adjustments made to the pay plan, such as a cost of living increase that New Hires A new employee’s starting salary largely depends on the amount of education and experience the employee possesses beyond the minimum requirements for the job. Typically, an employee holding only the minimum education and experience requirements for a classification is hired at or near the classification’s pay grade minimum. An upper limit to the percentage above minimum that can be offered to a new employee with only the minimum requirements should be established, where approval is needed to offer a starting salary that is a higher percentage above minimum. Another threshold should be established as the maximum starting salary possible without approval for new employees with considerable experience and/or education above the requirements for the position. It is common for the midpoint to be used as the maximum starting salary for most classifications. Once the Village has performed the initial implementation adjustment for current employee salaries, new employee starting salaries should take into consideration internal equity, meaning that new hires should be offered comparable salaries to existing employees in the classification with similar levels of education and experience. Evergreen provided the Village with a New Hire Calculator to assist in this effort. Promotions/Demotions When an employee is promoted to a new classification, it is important to have guidelines for calculating the employee’s new salary that the employee for their new responsibilities, moves the salary into the new pay grade, and ensures internal equity in the new classification. It is common for organizations to establish a minimum percentage salary increase that depends on the increase in pay grade resulting from promotion. Regardless of the minimum percentage increase, the employee’s new salary should be within the new pay grade’s range, and internal equity of salaries within the classification should be preserved. Similarly, an employee who is demoted should also have a commensurate percentage of their salary reduced relative to the grade of their demoted classification. Transfers An employee transfer occurs when an employee is reassigned to a classification at the same pay grade as their current classification or when an employee’s classification stays the same, but their department changes. In either of these cases, it is likely that no adjustment is necessary to the employee’s salary. The only situation in which a salary adjustment would be Chapter 5 - Recommendations Compensation and Classification Study for Miami Shores Village, FL Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 5-7 needed for a transferred employee would be if their current salary is not aligned with the salaries of employees in the new classification or department. If that occurs, it may be necessary to adjust the salary of the employee or the incumbents of the classification to ensure salary equity within the new classification. RECOMMENDATION 8: Evergreen recommends the Village implement a critical classification program and compensate those classifications that qualify 10 percent above their current base rate of compensation. Critical Classifications The Village’s human resources staff should assess all classifications each year to determine those that should be categorized as “critical” based on market data collected for that year and turnover. In the first year, it is recommended that the critical class supplement be 10 percent for those classifications with more than 30 percent turnover and/or a market rate percent difference of 20 percent or more (after accounting for the new salary range assignments). Furthermore, if adopted by the Village, a critical class supplement could be increased to a larger percentage of base pay. For example, if the Village in the future experiences considerable competitive pressure in hiring candidates for a specific classification. Some of the pressure may relate to the pay ranges, but other factors such as the available supply of labor, compared to the demands of experienced candidates, may also be present. As a result, the base pay of the associated classification would be increased so long as the external market pressures remain prevalent. Recommendation 9: Implement quality assurance and quality control processes to ensure employee data is accurate. Accurate data is essential for an organization’s Human Resources and Finance departments, ensuring fair compensation, correct benefits, and legal compliance while managing budgets. To maintain data integrity, implementing robust quality assurance and control (QA/QC) processes, including regular data review and cleanup, is crucial. Without these safeguards, errors like misclassifications, incorrect pay rates, and inaccurate retirement calculations can occur, leading to budget discrepancies, legal issues, and loss of employee trust. Common data errors arise from manual entry, inconsistent management practices, or software transitions, particularly during new hires, employee record updates, or status changes such as promotions or benefits adjustments. These challenges underscore the need for rigorous data management and ongoing review protocols. 5.4 SUMMARY The Village should be commended for its desire and commitment to provide competitive and fair compensation for its employees. The recommendations in this report establish a new competitive pay plan, externally and internally equitable classification titles and pay grade assignments, and system administration practices that will provide the Village with a responsive compensation and classification system for years to come. While the upkeep of this recommended system will require concrete effort, the Village will find that having a competitive compensation and classification system that encourages strong recruitment and employee retention is worth this commitment.