RES 87426 - Laserfiche WebLink

1. Many job classifications are so similar in content, availability, and current utilization that handling them individually in the affirmative action plan is not necessary. Grouping together these very similar classifications is best and simplest. 2. For many job classifications, the availability data that can be collected is limited, and the same data must be used for several related jobs. Therefore, grouping these related classifications together is logical and necessary. 3. Many job classifications have so few people in them that identifying underutilization is impossible or meaningless. By grouping several similar classifications and increasing the number of employees involved, a meaningful utilization analysis can be conducted. A list of the City's thirteen job groups is found in Appendix A. 2. Identify Relevant Labor Areas An identification was made of each job classification's relevant labor or recruitment area (the area from which the City obtains applicants and hence the area from which availability data should be gathered). This identification of labor areas was made by examining past recruitment practices and via an applicant residence analysis of 1,372 applicants for sixteen city classifications-from twenty recruitments which occurred during 1986. Through reference to the labor area assigned each classification, the city was able to determine which of the followi'ng areas applied for each job group: a. Local Labor Area b. Bay Area c. State d. Promotional Pools A list of each classification's relevant labor area is found by job group in Appendix A. 3. Define Local Labor Area and Bay Area The applicant residence analysis described above, was used to define the geographic boundaries of the local labor area and the Bay Area, since these are subject to interpretation. LHM/kh(kaffirm) 9/87