A common argument made by municipalities is that step and longevity pay more than cover any increase in the cost of living over time. They will show that over the course of an employee’s career, salary with step and longevity pay is 30% (or some other number) ahead of inflation, and that any future pay increase isn’t necessary. This logic is fundamentally wrong.
Step and longevity increases are meant to compensate for the additional value that experience brings. Without proper compensation, an employee could leave for another position where their value is recognized. Consider this example. A police officer who recently graduated from the academy takes a position with a unit. As a first-year officer, he or she doesn’t have the experience and knowledge that an officer with higher tenure has. A rookie will make rookie mistakes as there is a learning curve associated with any new job. After the first year is complete, the now second-year officer will have gained more experience, have undertaken more training, and will have learned a great deal that the academy just can’t replicate. Furthermore, the officer will have built a network of contacts and will have learned the ins and outs of the neighborhood. This additional experience is valuable, and as a more valuable asset to the municipality, the officer needs to be compensated appropriately.
In short, step and longevity increases are meant to compensate for the additional value that time and experience bring. They are NOT cost of living adjustments, and any statement otherwise, is fundamentally wrong.
