Core Services Review - Brampton Budget... · 2015. 3. 26. · 2. Non-Union Wage Freeze Summary of...
Transcript of Core Services Review - Brampton Budget... · 2015. 3. 26. · 2. Non-Union Wage Freeze Summary of...
Core Services Review
March 25, 2015 – 9:00AM
Special Budget Sub-committee Meeting
Brampton City Hall
Council Chambers
PAGE 1
Overview
1. Current Situation
2. Proposed Non-Union Wage ‘Freeze’
3. Core Services Review – Alternate Sustainable Approach to Wage
Cost Containment
4. Conclusion
PAGE 2
1. Current Situation
Perception
• Financial Review of the City of Brampton – Jim McCarter’s Report
• Section 7 – Managing Operating Expenses: Operating expenditures increasing at a
rate significantly in excess of Brampton’s growth
• Public Sector Disclosure Act – ‘Sunshine List’
• Perception that Brampton has an excessive amount of employees on the list
• Toronto STAR, Brampton Guardian, and The Globe and Mail articles
• Portraying Brampton Administration to be overpaid and bloated
Perception is that Brampton has a staff and salary issue
PAGE 3
1. Current Situation
Growth of Brampton’s Operation
PAGE 4
Year Full Time Staff Population Annual Expenses ($000s)
2005 1,868 422,600 $ 340,335
2006 1,947 436,000 $ 318,755
2007 2,097 452,039 $ 347,844
2008 2,238 487,230 $ 371,400
2009 2,441 497,680 $ 363,656
2010 2,521 504,600 $ 380,539
2011 2,593 523,911 $ 411,122
2012 2,658 540,145 $ 448,803
2013 2,736 557,800 $ 470,907 Notes:
- All data used in this spreadsheet sourced from Brampton’s Financial Information
Return (FIR) provided to the province annually.
1. Current Situation
PAGE 5
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Fu
ll T
ime
Sta
ff
Po
pu
lati
on
/ A
nn
ual
Exp
ense
s ($
000)
Growth of Brampton’s Operation
Population Annual Expenses ($000s) Full Time Staff
Notes:
- All data used in this graph sourced from Brampton’s Financial Information Return
(FIR) provided to the province annually.
1. Current Situation
2013 Public Sector Disclosure
• Brampton had 315 staff members on the ‘Sunshine List’ in 2013
• The distribution of salaries for staff on the list was:
• $100,000 to $119,999 = 204
• $120,000 to $139,999 = 70
• $140,000 to $159,999 = 20
• $160,000 to $179,999 = 14
• $180,000 to $199,999 = 5
• $200,000 plus = 2
PAGE 6
1. Current Situation
2013 Public Sector Disclosure
Notes:
* - City of Toronto numbers include Library, TCHC, & TTC
** - Population data courtesy of Statistics Canada census in 2011 and counts are municipal (“census subdivision”) not population dwellings
*** - Police Staff NOT included in the calculation of ‘Population : one (1) staff member of Sunshine List’.
PAGE 7
City
Population**
Number of Staff on
‘Sunshine List’
Population : one (1) staff
member on
‘Sunshine List’***
Police
Staff
City of Toronto* 2,615,060 6,811* 384 : 1
2,983
City of Hamilton 519,949 848 613 : 1 Region
City of Ottawa 883,391 1,149 769 : 1
1,039
City of London 366,151 362 1,011 : 1
192
City of Vaughan 288,301 258 1,117 : 1 Region
City of Mississauga 713,443 484 1,474 : 1 Region
City of Brampton 523,911 315 1,663 : 1 Region
1. Current Situation
PAGE 8
Notes:
- City of Toronto numbers include Library, TCHC, & TTC
* - Population data courtesy of Statistics Canada census in 2011
* - Population counts are municipal (“census subdivision”) not population dwellings
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
-
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
City ofToronto
City ofOttawa
City ofHamilton
City ofMississauga
City ofLondon
City ofBrampton
City ofVaughan
Nu
mb
er o
f S
taff
on
‘Su
nsh
ine
Lis
t’
Po
pu
lati
on
*
2013 Public Sector Disclosure Number of Staff on ‘Sunshine List’ compared to Population
Population Number of Staff on Sunshine List
1. Current Situation
PAGE 9
Notes:
* - Population data courtesy of Statistics Canada census in 2011
* - Population counts are municipal (“census subdivision”) not population dwellings
1,663 : 1
1,474 : 1
1,117 : 1
1,011 : 1
769 : 1
613 : 1
384 : 1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
City of Brampton
City of Mississauga
City of Vaughan
City of London
City of Ottawa
City of Hamiton
City of Toronto
Population*
2013 Public Sector Disclosure Population : one (1) staff member on ‘Sunshine List’
1. Current Situation
2013 Public Sector Disclosure
PAGE 10
‘Sunshine List’ - Salary Distribution CITY $100K - $119K $120K - $139K $140K - $159K $160K - $179K $180K - $199K $200K + TOTAL
City of Toronto 4,777 1,514 275 163 34 48 6,811
City of Ottawa 824 244 49 16 4 12 1,149
City of Hamilton 637 142 48 12 5 4 848
City of Mississauga 345 96 17 20 3 3 484
City of London 301 41 10 5 4 1 362
City of Brampton 204 70 20 14 5 2 315
City of Vaughan 165 52 20 10 4 7 258
‘Sunshine List’ - % Salary Distribution
CITY $100K - $119K $120K - $139K $140K - $159K $160K - $179K $180K - $199K $200K + TOTAL
City of Toronto 70.1% 22.2% 4.0% 2.4% 0.5% 0.7% 100%
City of Ottawa 71.7% 21.2% 4.3% 1.4% 0.3% 1.0% 100%
City of Hamilton 75.1% 16.7% 5.7% 1.4% 0.6% 0.5% 100%
City of Mississauga 71.3% 19.8% 3.5% 4.1% 0.6% 0.6% 100%
City of London 83.1% 11.3% 2.8% 1.4% 1.1% 0.3% 100%
City of Brampton 64.8% 22.2% 6.3% 4.4% 1.6% 0.6% 100%
City of Vaughan 64.0% 20.2% 7.8% 3.9% 1.6% 2.7% 100%
1. Current Situation
PAGE 11
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
$100K -$119K
$120K -$139K
$140K -$159K
$160K -$179K
$180K -$199K
$200K +
% o
f to
tal s
taff
on
th
e ‘S
un
shin
e L
ist’
Salary Intervals
2013 Public Sector Disclosure ‘Sunshine List’ - Salary Distribution
City of Toronto
City of Ottawa
City of Hamilton
City of Mississauga
City of London
City of Brampton
City of Vaughan
1. Current Situation
Summary
• Our annual expenses are increasing at a comparable rate as the population
and full time employment in Brampton
• The number of Brampton staff on the ‘Sunshine List’ in 2013 was LOWER
when compared to neighbouring City’s
• Population per one (1) municipal staff member on the sunshine list was the
LOWEST compared to the seven City’s reviewed in 2013
• Brampton’s salary distribution of ‘Sunshine List’ staff in 2013 compares to
the seven City’s reviewed
PAGE 12
2. Non-Union Wage Freeze
Summary of Non-Union Staff
• Total Compensation (inclusive of Fringe Benefits and WSIB) for all non-
union employees
• = $99,591,633 (31.5% of total City Compensation)
• 2015 – 1.5% Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA) increase to non-union staff
• = $1,493,875
• Impact on the 2015 Property Tax Bill
• = 0.41%
PAGE 13
2. Non-Union Wage Freeze
Impact of Non-Union Wage Freeze
• Immediate and sustainable staff moral impact
• Compression issue within 3 years: Pay reconciliation must happen
• Top performer competition
• Administration output will suffer
• Corporate culture impact
• Short term solution
PAGE 14
3. Core Services Review
Core Services Review
There is an alternative and sustainable approach that can be taken to achieve
wage cost containment – Core Services Review.
This can be achieved through the development of a ‘Staff Rationalization +
Reduction Strategy’ with responsible workforce planning.
PAGE 15
3. Core Services Review
Staff Rationalization + Reduction Strategy WORKFORCE PLANNING
• Sustainable reduction in staff salaries can be completed through a rigorous review of the
current administration
• Framework:
• Set a reduction target over a period of time: 12% by 2017
• Review all non-union positions with respect to core versus projected needs relative
to Brampton’s growth profile
• Staff reductions to come from:
• Attrition / No rehiring in vacancies of non-essential positions;
• Early retirements;
• Job cuts based on necessity or identified redundancies; and
• Elimination of poor performers.
• Executive Leadership Team (ELT) would conduct the review
• Provide Council with a reduction plan that would yield a greater value in savings to
the tax payer extending over the current term of Council and beyond
PAGE 16
3. Core Services Review
Staff Rationalization + Reduction Strategy WORKFORCE PLANNING
DRIVERS
1. Certain functions are no longer required, for example due to automation,
outsourcing, redundancy or no longer required (obsolete).
2. Workforce cannot be sustained in its current alignment due to budget
constraints.
3. The organization has undergone a shift in strategic direction and needs to
be realigned further with the new goals and objectives.
PAGE 17
3. Core Services Review
Balanced Administration
PAGE 18
Nu
mb
er o
f S
taff
Time
BASELINE
2014
• Retirees
• Non-essential positions
• Non-performers
GROWTH
• Essential positions
• Succession focused
• Forward thinking
• Performance Management
3. Core Services Review
Implementation Approach
PAGE 19
Recommend
Attrition Plan Voluntary Severance Performance Mgmt. Early Retirement
Analyze
Capacity Review Business Efficiency Essential Services
Identify
Staff Performance Priority Positions Vacancy Review
4. Conclusion
Conclusion
• A Core Services Review will yield a more significant impact on City
payroll reductions than a freeze in wages for non-union staff.
• Benefits Include:
• No compression issue
• Focused work force
• Aligns with our growth profile
• Supports performance measurement and succession planning
• Better corporate culture
• Strengthens reputation
• A natural outcome of recent corporate re-alignment that reduced
seven (7) departments down to four (4).
PAGE 20
4. Conclusion
Proposed Resolution
• With respect to report G3 proposed for the March 13, 2015 Special Meeting
of the Budget Sub-Committee, that recommendations made by staff be
approved and further direction be given to the Interim City Manager and the
Executive Leadership Team to formulate a core services review to reduce
the non-union administration by 12% by 2017 and present to City Council
with a detailed plan for approval and implementation.
PAGE 21
Core Services Review Staff Rationalization + Reduction Strategy
Thank You
PAGE 22