HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974 03-26 Union Claims Maplewood Administrator's Pay Hiked 15% DISPATCH Union Claims Maplewood
Administrator's Pa Hiked 15 %Q. �O q`I
Non-union employes at County & Municipal Em- ago."
Maplewood's City Hall, ployes — said that May- TheThe increases for indi-
most of them adminis- payroll for the 10 vidual administrators
or Robert Bruton's re- non-union employes in ranged from a low 9.5
trators, received aver- port of-average increas- early 1973 was $147,098, per cent to a high of" 35
age pay increases of 15 es of seven per cent in he said. per cent.
per cent in the past the past year was "inac- Since then the pay for Mayor Bruton, at a re-
year, man according union ocurate or misleading at the
roe employes has cent city council meet-
increased
$22,082, ac ing, defended the pay in-
employes.
Were basing our fig- cording to his figures, or creases.
The spokesman for the ures, he explained, "on a total 15 per cent.
But he listed them at a
union �- the American what the employes earn He listed the current total $10,580 or seven per
Federation of Stat e, today and exactly a year salaries at$169,180. cent.
When confronted with
the union's tabulations,
he suggested the 15 per •
cent was based on 1972
salaries,not 1973.
"I think the council
should have set 1973 sal-
aries in December
1972," he explained, "but
ended up postponing the
action because a person-
nel study was under
way."
He said the 1973 sala-
ries weren't set up until
late in the year and that
they were retroactive
only to July 1.
The council's most re-
cent action, he said, was
to set 1974 salaries.
"Obviously, I'm talk-
ing about one year," he
concluded, "the union
must be talking about
two years, all the way
back to 1972."
The union spokesman
denied this. He said the
council approved
across-the-board i n-
creases of 4.5 per cent in
December 1972.
As for individual pay
hikes of up to 35 per
cent, Mayor Bruton said
that resulted because of
an "upgrading" of some
positions.
"The personnel
1 study," he commented,
"indicated that some of
our employes were
being _"'what teyshould paid below
been earning in their po-
sition."
T h e administrative
pay increases have been
a source of controversy
on the council.
Councilman John
G r e a vu has dissented '
most of the time.
He has accused the
council-majority of giv-
ing a few employes "all
the gravy."