Alabama Senate Bill SB68

Alabama 2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/7/24
• Refer: 4/11/24
• Refer: 2/7/24
• Report Pass: 4/30/24
• Enrolled: 5/2/24
• Passed: 5/9/24

Caption

State employees, cost-of-living increase for fiscal year beginning October 1, 2024

Impact

This legislation is significant for state employees as it directly affects their compensation during a time of rising living costs. By implementing a standardized cost-of-living adjustment, SB68 seeks to help maintain the purchasing power of state employees, which is crucial for attracting and retaining talent in public service roles. The act additionally mandates that the Director of the State Personnel Department revise salary schedules accordingly, ensuring that affected employees receive their adjustments without delay.

Summary

SB68, proposed by Senator Albritton, aims to provide a cost-of-living increase of two percent for state employees in Alabama, which includes those in both classified and unclassified service and certain other judicial and legislative personnel. The bill is set to take effect beginning with the first pay day on or after October 1, 2024. It specifically excludes local supplements tied to state employee salaries and does not apply to those whose pay is governed by labor agreements.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB68 appears to be supportive, particularly among state employees and public service advocates who view the increase as a necessary response to inflation. However, there might be concerns from parties focused on budget constraints, as the appropriations required for the increase will need to be outlined in the annual budget, leading to debates regarding funding and fiscal responsibility.

Contention

One notable point of contention regarding SB68 is its exclusion of certain employees from receiving the cost-of-living increase, particularly those covered by labor contracts. This raises questions about equity and fairness among various categories of state employees. Additionally, the requirement for the increase to be included in the annual budget may lead to tensions in legislative discussions about fiscal priorities and budget allocations, potentially sparking debates between different interest groups regarding funding for state compensation and public services.