A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to discussing the classification and compensation framework for municipal employees. The board considered introducing a new Schedule E to differentiate between hourly non-exempt rates and exempt annual salaries, as part of ongoing efforts to streamline the process and reduce confusion. This proposal aimed to clarify how salaries are calculated, particularly concerning the number of hours worked, which has been a point of contention.

An interesting proposal emerged during the meeting. This proposal aimed to make positions more attractive to seasoned professionals by offering additional vacation time, such as one week for every seven years of service. However, concerns were raised about equity among existing employees, emphasizing the need for fair treatment across the board should any changes be implemented. The conversation underscored the relevance of the town’s compensation study in addressing these considerations, with a unified approach deemed necessary to maintain consistency and fairness among all town employees.

The board also grappled with challenges in recruiting for several positions, including an administrative role for the Board of Selectmen, the building commissioner, and the public health nurse. With approximately 150 applicants for the administrative position, issues with candidate communication led to a decision to pause recruitment until the New Year. Similarly, the building commissioner vacancy remained open, with discussions about salary and vacation considerations for potential hires. An interim building commissioner and a search committee were engaged in reviewing applications, with some interest in a former candidate who reapplied. The board stressed the importance of attracting qualified candidates while addressing concerns of existing staff members regarding compensation and benefits.

The discussion on personnel matters extended to grant-funded positions, specifically the shared co-response counselor in the police department. Questions arose about the grant’s duration and implications for future employment status, highlighting concerns about transitioning from grant-funded roles to wage and personnel positions once funding ends. The board acknowledged the necessity of including references to grant funding in job postings to facilitate future discussions on these roles’ sustainability.

In addition to these recruitment and compensation issues, the board discussed potential changes to various policies, including the grievance procedure and family medical leave adjustments. The need for legal counsel’s opinion on proposed changes to the grievance procedure was emphasized, given its relatively recent establishment. The board also considered integrating background checks for department head candidates into existing documents and bylaws.

The meeting touched on leave policies, specifically parental leave and its inclusion in the bylaw, while considering legal requirements surrounding family and domestic violence leave. The board recognized the potential for grievances related to these policies and acknowledged that matters concerning domestic violence and small necessities were governed by state and federal law, reducing the need for additional bylaw language.