By Matt Nelson, Special Writer
HIGHTSTOWN — At Monday’s meeting, the Borough Council unanimously approved 6-0 an ordinance establishing salary ranges for certain officers and employees.
It confirms official employment designations for each officer and employee in the borough of Hightstown and supersedes all previous salary ordinances and is in effect until changed by the new adoption of a new or amending salary ordinance.
Those who were in attendance had mixed feelings about this ordinance. Among the people who gave positive feedback was Eugene Sarafin of Hightstown.
”Some might question the range, but basically you have starting and ending salaries and what you have here is appropriate,” said Mr. Sarafin.
J.P Gibbons of Hightstown said he always has an issue with this ordinance whenever it is presented to the Hightstown Borough.
”I believe every job in the borough should have a competency level established to it and a value assigned to it and I object … to having ranges that tell me that for example a borough clerk is fine at $40,000-$70,000. It doesn’t make any sense. You have a qualification packet that tells you how much experience you want for that position and it has a price range to it,” said Mr. Gibbons.
He added, “The problem here is we sit back and we hire someone at $40,000 and then we’ll let that person learn the job and then we give them pay raises and every year or so that we can cover them to $70,000.”
Dan Buriak of Hightstown works in human resources for a company that has more than 100,000 employees and said, “Salary ranges are appropriate for how to conduct a business.”
According to Scott Caster of Hightstown, there is a concern for employees who are at the bottom, employees who aren’t making enough money compared to other employees and officers.
”It’s come to my attention that we have a borough employee who makes $10 an hour who is part-time, but I believe more full-time than-part time and has no benefits. As far as I know, they don’t get health coverage, holidays and (don’t) get unionized. When you see their situation, you wonder if it’s addressed the way it should be, or if there is room to satisfy him with more attention,” Mr. Caster said.
Mr. Caster did not state the name of the employee during the public hearing.
In the midst of the comments that were given on Monday, the council members voted unanimously to put the ordinance into effect.
