Discussions began with the Council reviewing the current starting wage of $18.82 for bus operators, which was deemed insufficient by union representatives when compared to industry standards. The proposed 3% increase, which would bring the starting wage to $19.87, was criticized as inadequate for attracting and retaining skilled labor. Union representatives expressed that the low starting salary, even after the proposed raise, would not meet the needs of employees, particularly those with previous bus driving experience. Concerns were raised that stagnant wages contributed to high turnover rates, with one representative stating, “I think that’s a low number. That’s not industry standards for a professional bus operator.”

The dialogue also highlighted the impact of current wages on employee morale, especially among those at the lower end of the wage scale. Union representatives noted that employees at the top rate would feel demotivated by new hires starting at a similar low wage, ultimately fostering a negative work environment. A representative shared observations of employees leaving during training, attributing some departures to dissatisfaction with wages and working conditions. The union emphasized the need for a more competitive wage structure, given the skills required for bus operators and technicians, stating, “A lot of people think you just drive. You got to have a lot of skills.”

In addition to discussions about wages for bus operators, there was concern over the disparity in wages between different positions within ECAT, such as maintenance workers and cleaners, who earn approximately $15.49 per hour. The union suggested adjusting the wage table for lower-paid positions to alleviate some compensation issues, as the current rates were deemed insufficient for a living wage.

Management highlighted budgetary constraints as a significant hurdle, with officials indicating limited funding available for wage increases. They stated, “there’s not room to increase the wage table,” emphasizing the financial limitations dictating the current wage offerings. However, union representatives argued that without wage adjustments, the county would struggle to attract and retain qualified employees, stating, “I think you’re going to be the one struggling to hire people.”

The conversation also touched on the importance of transparency and communication in wage negotiations. A request was made for clear documentation and communication of any wage adjustments, including an email to the union detailing existing employee wage rates before and after the proposed 3% raise. There was a call for better dialogue between the council and union representatives to ensure all parties understood the implications of wage decisions.

Amid these discussions, the Council considered implementing a revised wage progression structure that would eliminate the initial step, starting new hires at a higher base wage of $19.97. This change aimed to attract qualified individuals to ECAT and ensure fair compensation for existing employees relative to their experience and service. The proposal intended to shorten the wage progression period from five years to four, providing a more competitive salary structure.

The proposed 3% wage increase was debated, with some expressing hope that the union would accept it to avoid prolonged negotiations. Others pointed out that while the increase was better than nothing, it fell short of truly addressing the wage gap and ensuring skilled worker retention. There was a general consensus that while the proposed increase was a step forward, further adjustments might be necessary to create a more sustainable and equitable wage structure.