Bill Summary: The proposal authorizes the Personnel Advisory Board to establish specific pay parameters for personnel who work in Department of Corrections facilities based on job hazards, years of service, and staffing requirements.

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011


Total Estimated Net Effect on General Revenue Fund	$0	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011


Total Estimated Net Effect on Other State Funds	$0	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011


Total Estimated Net Effect on All Federal Funds	$0	$0	$0

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011


Total Estimated Net Effect on FTE	0	0	0

☐ Estimated Total Net Effect on All funds expected to exceed $100,000 savings or (cost).

☐ Estimated Net Effect on General Revenue Fund expected to exceed $100,000 (cost).

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS
FUND AFFECTED	FY 2009	FY 2010	FY 2011
Local Government	$0	$0	$0

Officials from the Office of Administration – Administrative Hearing Commission assume the proposal would have no fiscal impact on their agency.

Officials from the Office of Administration – Division of Personnel state they responsible for implementing a classification and pay system uniformly applied among all agencies within the Uniform Classification and Pay System (UCP). Each of the general pay parameters mentioned in the proposed legislation are currently available as options. Therefore, the proposed legislation has minimal impact.

The first parameter mentioned in the proposed legislation involves hazardous duty pay. Under the state’s UCP System, some classifications are assigned to a higher pay range to account for the hazardous nature of the duties on a classification-wide basis. Corrections Officers I, II, III, and Supervisor I have been determined to perform hazardous duty functions as part of their normal job duties and are, therefore, compensated at a higher pay range.

Note: There is also a special pay differential in the amount of $25.00 per semi-monthly pay period for corrections employees who serve on the Emergency Squad and have responsibility for addressing major emergency situations in adult institutions, effective November 1, 2000.

The second parameter mentioned in the proposed legislation involves longevity pay. Longevity increases have been recommended as part of the Pay Plan for several years however, have only sporadically been adopted.

The third parameter involves 24/7 staffing requirements. Currently, shift differentials for Corrections Officers I, II, III, and Supervisor I in the amount of $.30 per hour exist for shifts that begin between the hours of 12:00 noon and 5:00 a.m., effective July 1, 2004 and revised July 1, 2006.

If adopted, this legislation may lead to other agencies requesting similar pay parameters for their employees. The Division of Personnel may incur greater costs in investigating and responding to each request as well as performing job classification studies to determine if classifications within requesting agencies perform hazardous job functions, although the actual cost is difficult to calculate.

Officials from the Department of Corrections (DOC) assume the proposal would result in unknown costs because the pay parameters were not specified in the proposal.

Oversight assumes the language in the proposal is permissive and authorizes the Personnel Advisory Board to establish specific pay parameters for certain personnel within the Department of Corrections. Therefore, Oversight assumes the proposal would have no fiscal impact.

No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.

The proposed legislation duplicates RSMo 36.140, 1 CSR 20-2.010 and 1 CSR 20-2.020 in regard to establishing authority and responsibility to the Office of Administration – Division of Personnel and the Personnel Advisory Board for preparation, adoption and administration of a pay plan for agencies covered by the classification and pay provisions of the State Personnel Law.

The proposed legislation also duplicates RSMo 36.060 (5) and 1 CSR 20-2.010 and 1 CSR 20-2.020 which allows the Personnel Advisory Board to make suggestions and recommendations to promote uniformity in compensation of various employees in state service.

This legislation is not federally mandated and would not require additional capital improvements or rental space.