The Butler County salary board may revise the 2015 pay increases for 13 nonunion workers.

County Controller Ben Holland, who sits on the salary board with the three county commissioners, proposed Monday that some posts previously given 1 percent pay hikes for next year receive another 1 percent increase while other jobs receive up to 5 percent.

Holland said the revised pay increase structure provides more compensation for people who are underpaid according to a salary study.

Under the proposal, posts such as car pool director would receive a total 3 percent increase, which would raise that job’s salary from $53,112 to $54,705.

The elections bureau director and the director of community corrections/chief probation officer would each get a total increase of 4 percent, changing the former from $50,771 to $52,802 and the latter from $72,689 to $75,597.

The chief assessor and the tax claim director for county property and revenue each would receive 5 percent. The chief assessor’s pay would rise from $64,061 to $67,265 while the tax claim director would go from $46,633 to $48,965.

Posts such as payroll administrator and records coordinator in human resources would receive 2 percent instead of 1 percent.

Holland said in an interview the reversal on some posts previously being given just 1 percent was due to a brokered deal with the commissioners.

Commissioner Bill McCarrier, board chairman, refuted Holland’s claim.

“I don’t know who he brokered with,” McCarrier said in an interview. “It wasn’t with me.”

The salary board earlier this month set pay increases, which the county calls cost-of-living adjustments, for most of the 150 nonunion employees.

Those receiving increases received 1 percent or 2 percent, depending on the post. Employees recently promoted or newly hired were not given a cost of living adjustment.

The salary board is set to vote on the proposal Wednesday.

Commissioner Jim Eckstein, the sole Democrat on the board, accused McCarrier and Commissioner Dale Pinkerton of orchestrating this latest revision to ensure some employees did not receive less than 2 percent. “We’re pandering to specific interests,” Eckstein said.

He alleged his fellow commissioners violated the state Sunshine Act by meeting privately to discuss this issue. McCarrier denied that was the case. “I don’t have the faintest idea what you’re talking about,” he said.

After Eckstein provided further description about what meeting he was talking about, McCarrier denied there was any impropriety. McCarrier said there was no deliberation or decisions rendered. Under state law, an elected board may have a quorum while gathering information as long as its members don’t discuss the issue.

McCarrier said they listened to concerns expressed by some workers.