During a Tuesday meeting, Travis County employees raised grievances related to staff’s presentation of possible adjustments to the county’s pay scale in the FY25-26 budget, including a “modernization” proposal that would designate employees either exempt or non-exempt. Staff says this structural change is necessary to address the county’s issues retaining talent.
The difference between exempt and non-exempt employees is that non-exempt workers are entitled to certain protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act, because they are paid an hourly wage or less than the minimum wage. Employees are exempt if they make more than a Department of Labor salary threshold amount.
Since 2022, the lowest paid employees at Travis County have seen consistent increases in wages. In 2022, there was an across-the-board increase, from $15 to $20 per hour and, in 2024, that increased another 4 percent. But in other areas, county staff has been consistently flagging improper compensation – for example, in the Public Defender’s Office.
Several speakers urged commissioners to fix the pay disparity between public defenders and prosecutors. Jolie McCullough, an investigator for the defender’s office said “even with the most generous of the options, we would still be paid on average $20,000 less than our counterparts in the County Attorney and District Attorney’s offices. We are doing the same work, and we are making 60 percent less than these people. And if you look at other big cities in the state, and Harris County and Dallas County, these public defense investigators are also making $30,000 more than us on average, and they don’t have disparity with their prosecutorial counterparts.”
Staff argued that without a market adjustment, a 3 percent across-the-board raise would be the only option for all employees that wouldn’t impact other parts of the budget. Even then, there would still be disparities, like people at the low end of the pay scale being paid above market while more experienced employees would be paid below market.
AFSCME Local 1624, Travis County’s employee union, has put forth a proposal that would allow every City and county employee to make at least the MIT Living Wage — currently $24.55 an hour, or around $51,000 a year. To that end, they are advocating a 4 percent across-the-board raise, a flat raise between $2,000 and $2,120 for those making within the $50,000 and $53,000 range, and a cap for cost-of-living raises at $5,000 a year. On its website, AFSCME writes, “This structure lifts up those below the living wage, supports middle-income workers, and ensures our proposal stays strong and realistic in budget negotiations.”
The main concern the union has with an exempt/non-exempt designation is that it would put the onus on different supervisors to advocate for raises individually per department.
“From an equity standpoint, how are we going to treat these folks within these different pay scales? Will they have different advocacy for their pay raises throughout the years? Will the way that they have communication from their supervisors look different?” said AFSCME’s Ben Suddaby. “We’re not in favor of that part of it,”
Dr. June Mighty, the county’s chief human resource officer countered that it is “not something new.” “
It’s not something designed to divide our employees. It is actually a best practice, especially as an organization grows and becomes more complex,” said Mighty.
She argued that it will help the county boost retention by improving competitive pay appropriate to the type of work, and allow movement from non-exempt to exempt positions to reduce turnover. Staff pointed out that Austin already has this structure, as well as several peer cities and counties like Fort Worth and Dallas as well as Tarrant and Williamson counties.
Commissioner Ann Howard warned that the current inequity in pay has been a result of different applied raises already, saying
“I would argue (that is) what’s happened the last couple of years, because we don’t have the specificity. People have come and argued because they can’t hire or retain, and we’ve made some one-off adjustments, and that’s what we want to get away from,” said Ann Howard. “We want to know that we’re applying the same science to everyone all the time.”
The most outspoken against the change was Carol Guthrie, AFSCME local 1624 business manager, who noted that even with last year’s across-the-board raise, the lowest paid in the county are still not making a living wage.
“I want to thank you, commissioners, for bringing these people up from $31,000 to $43,000 (a year.) And why don’t you try living on $43,000 a year? We do not have a lot of money, and it is a time when people are hurting,” she said. “Everyone deserves to be compensated this year, not a handful of people, especially in a flawed process. This is not a true market study. Two years later, we’re still talking about it. It’s changing every minute. There were changes this morning. Why do we keep pushing something that doesn’t work?”
It was clear from public testimony that the disparity in the Public Defender’s Office was the most urgent issue.
“Whichever one of these versions you adopt, I’m going to ask you to specifically try to fix that clear inequity now,” urged Seth Manetta-Dillon, a criminal defense practice supervisor at TCPDO. “Throughout the entire county, people are paid well below the midpoint (a fair wage in the pay scale in the market study). The only way to fix that is to implement a market study to start making these changes in phases. Nobody’s under the belief that it’s going to be instantaneous, but if we don’t do it now, it’s never going to get done. And we’re going to keep kicking the can down the road.”
The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.