Kctcs Compensation analysis

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Town Hall Presentation January 9-10, 2002 Curtis Powell Vice President for Human Resources The Division of Human Resources and William M. Mercer, Incorporated.
Advertisements

State of New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services Division of Personnel Workforce Development Strategic Plan.
DENTON ISD Pay Study Design
1 Miami Dade College Reclassification Study Presented by the Division of Human Resources February 2007.
Faculty & Staff Compensation Programs Board of Regents Meeting
PAYING THEM RIGHT: TOOLS FOR SALARY ADMINISTRATION HR Liaison Network Spring Meeting Texas A&M University, Human Resources DIVISION OF FINANCE February.
Human Resource Management Lecture-28. Job Pricing.
The Catholic University of America Staff Compensation Study Town Hall Meeting February 12, 2003.
Human Resources Peer Network Fundamentals of Compensation and Utilizing the CPCA Compensation & Benefits Survey April 3, 2014 Presented by: Brenda Gilchrist,
Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study Summary Findings
Staff Compensation Program Update
Introduction of Total Rewards & Implementation of Market Pay Zones Presented by: UMHS Compensation 5/15/08.
Compensation Deborah Marsh November Total Rewards Total Rewards definition Total Rewards definition Why Total Rewards? Why Total Rewards? Elements.
Introduction to Compensation. Agenda Marquette University’s compensation philosophy What is the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)? Definition and differences.
Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1.
© 2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved. Salary Survey Report January 30, 2007 State of Kansas.
Total Rewards and Compensation
POSITION AND SALARY MANAGEMENT LEAD 2012 Job Categories Position Descriptions Career Bands and Salary Ranges Position/Salary Change Requests 1.
STAFF COMPENSATION PROGRAM TOWN HALL MEETINGS FEBRUARY 2004.
Competitive Market Compensation Review July 2009 Project Overview.
1 Attract, Develop and Engage the Workforce of the 21 st Century New Job Classification System (JCCS) Manager Preparation Session February 2011.
21 st Century Maricopa Review of Process Human Resources Projects Steering Team Meeting May 12, 2010.
SECCP Salaried Employees Compensation and Classification Program June, 2005.
Staff Compensation Program – Phase 2 Internal Equity Adjustments October 2005.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Program Employee Presentation 2013.
How to attract and retain the best people in the Civil Service Albania perspective Fatmir Demneri Director Training Institute of Public Administration.
1 ACC FY07 Classification and Compensation Study.
Compensation Project Faculty & Staff Compensation Programs Board of Regents Finance Committee Meeting Project Overview
Butler University Compensation Study. b a c kn e x t h o m e About Fox Lawson & Associates  Bought Practice From Ernst & Young  Compensation Specialists.
Texas A& M University Central Texas Staff Salary Study Process February 25, 2014.
Compensation Study Preliminary Results Overview Presented by: CBIZ Human Capital Services October 26, 2015.
Compensation Study Preliminary Results Presented by: CBIZ Human Capital Services January 11, 2016.
Planning Personnel Department May 29, 2003 John UptonNicole Bennett.
Discussion on Compensation. Goal To assist in securing and retaining a staff of necessary quality to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization.
Managing Talent – Maximizing Your Employee’s Potential 3 rd SACCO LEADERS’ FORUM Monique DunbarLorri Lochrie Communicating Arts Credit UnionCentral 1 Credit.
City of Galveston Classification & Compensation Study Discussion Preliminary Findings and Recommendations.
COMPENSATION 101 CREATING & ADMINISTERING YOUR BASE PAY STRATEGY Consulting Inc.
Approve a Market Adjustment to the City of Southlake Employee Compensation Program Item 9B.
City of Southlake Strategy Map The City of Southlake provides municipal services that support the highest quality of life for our residents and businesses.
Management Advisory Group, Inc. Executive Summary City of Fairfax Compensation and Classification Study July 1, 2016.
UNIT 1. Compensation Management What is compensation management Compensation Management is designing and implementing total compensation package with.
student Financial aid “A Progress Report” Accomplishments
Annual Title I Parent Orientation Meeting
Staff Compensation Structure
ESTABLISHING STRATEGIC PAY PLANS
Academic Affairs Update
UNC Tomorrow Update UNC Board of Governors
Annual Title I Parent Orientation Meeting
FOP’s INVOLVEMENT In the development of the pay plan for UDC
Compensation: Creating an Equitable and Market-driven Pay System
Compensation Program Update
Program suspensions. KCTCS Responsiveness: PROgram Suspensions Pathways AND PIPELINES SOFT SKILLS.
Annual TITLE-I MEETING august 25, 2016
Introduction to Compensation
Working Title Guidelines
Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study Summary Findings
HRM 531 HELP Lessons in Excellence -- hrm531help.com.
HRM 531 HELP Education for Service-- hrm531help.com.
Kctcs Compensation analysis
Staff Compensation Update
KCTCS Strategic Plan Update: Retention rates
Changing Lanes Manassas Park City Schools’ Transition to a Non-Traditional Pay Structure.
University Budget Office (UBO)
Title and Total Compensation Project
Workforce Development Goal
Kctcs Compensation Environmental Overview
KCTCS Enrollment Trends and Financial implications
Classification and Compensation Department of Human Resources
Annual Title I Parent Orientation Meeting
Developing and Evaluating Processes and Practices
Presentation transcript:

Kctcs Compensation analysis Board of Regents Workshop – September, 2016

Studies undertaken without implementation. Why we are here Background KCTCS’s colleges need a revised classification and compensation system. Studies undertaken without implementation. Continued loss of key staff and faculty. Difficulties backfilling positions. Inconsistent application of exceptions. KCTCS needs a strong compensation philosophy. One standard classification and compensation system Easy to implement and administer Provides flexibility Reduces the need for exceptions Ensures system equity, consistency, and legal compliance Allows the colleges of KCTCS to recruit and retain qualified employees

Why we are here In March, 2015 the KCTCS Board requested a compensation classification study. History Last compensation and classification study was conducted and implemented in 2003. Scope 373 unique faculty and staff titles were benchmarked by HRG. Benchmarks were 36 colleges, universities and similar systems in surrounding states. College and University Professional Association of Human Resources (CUPA-HR), Kenexa and Economic Research Institute (ERI) databases were used for benchmarking.

Why we are here Results Consolidation and clarity of pay bands. A proposal to reduce the number of current job titles from 373 to 248. Adjustment of pay bands to better reflect market conditions. Financial modeling of moving everyone to at least band minimum. A consistent approach to the federally required Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Financial modeling of new FLSA regulations. A proposal to implement a pay program to fund hard to fill faculty disciplines. A financial forecast of an annual 3% salary increase. Updated compensation policies and procedures.

Team and resources KCTCS Leadership Hanna Resource Group (HRG) Wendell Followell Lyle Hanna Jackie Cecil Kurt Kessler KCTCS President’s Cabinet Candra Bryant KCTCS System Office Compensation Team Allison Pettrey Jean-Paul Philippe Stephanie May Shirley Snodgrass Tiffany Wagers

Team and resources Human Resource Directors from the colleges Kellie Allen Ashland Toni Whalen Jefferson Bryen Goble Big Sandy May Wright Madisonville Barbara Goatley Bluegrass Sandra Estill Maysville Kris Wood Elizabethtown Vicky Hohiemer Owensboro Phyllis Yeager Gateway Jill Meece Somerset Vickie Combs Hazard Sherri Forester Southcentral Doris Lake Henderson Billie Franks Southeast Yvonne Glasman Hopkinsville Bridget Canter West Kentucky

Team and resources President’s Leadership Team Dr. Gwen Joseph (interim) Jefferson Dr. Kay Adkins Ashland Dr. Judy Rhoads Madisonville Dr. Devin Stephenson Big Sandy Dr. Steve Vacik Maysville Dr. Augusta Julian Bluegrass Dr. Thelma White Elizabethtown Dr. Scott William Owensboro Dr. Jo Marshall Somerset Dr. Keith Bird (interim) Gateway Dr. Phil Neal Southcentral Dr. Stephen Greiner Hazard Dr. Lynn Moore Southeast Dr. Kris Williams Henderson Dr. Barbara Veazey West Kentucky Dr. Jay Allen Hopkinsville

Faculty - Average Compa ratio by college by Service Compa Ratio = Market / Salary * Does not include Corrections, Fire Commission System Office, Fire Rescue System Office, KBEMS, Virtual Learning/KCTCS Online

STAFF - Average Compa ratio by college by Service Compa Ratio = Market / Salary * Does not include Corrections, Fire Commission System Office, Fire Rescue System Office, KBEMS, Virtual Learning/KCTCS Online

Summary of findings Overall pay to market (compa ratio) for faculty is 85%. 45% of the faculty has over 15 years of service and their pay is 88% of market Overall pay to market (compa ratio) for staff is 87%. 29% of the staff has over 15 years of service and their pay is 96% of market

Faculty - Average Compa ratio by college by age Compa Ratio = Market / Salary * Does not include Corrections, Fire Commission System Office, Fire Rescue System Office, KBEMS, Virtual Learning/KCTCS Online

STAFF - Average Compa ratio by college by age Compa Ratio = Market / Salary * Does not include Corrections, Fire Commission System Office, Fire Rescue System Office, KBEMS, Virtual Learning/KCTCS Online

Summary of findings Overall pay to market (compa ratio) for faculty is 85%. 57% of the faculty is over 50-years-old and their pay is 86% of market Overall pay to market (compa ratio) for staff is 87%. 48% of the staff is over 50-years-old and their pay is 90% of market

Costing Compensation Philosophy “A compensation philosophy is simply a formal statement documenting the company’s position about employee compensation. It essentially explains the “why” behind employee pay and creates a framework for consistency. Employers can benefit from being transparent about their compensation philosophy and having an official pay strategy.” https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/compensationphilosophy.aspx

Costing Compensation Philosophy KCTCS recognizes the importance of providing market competitive pay and benefits in order to attract, retain, and engage the caliber of faculty and staff our institution requires to achieve excellence. The compensation system incorporates Performance Planning and Evaluation (PPE), rewards employees for achieving KCTCS goals and balances both internal and external financial resources. KCTCS is committed to providing equitable compensation in accordance with applicable laws. Guiding Principles Annually review market pay rates Achieve competitive market pay and benefits for all employees Bring people to band minimum first Address compression Periodically review hard-to-fill positions Reward performance

Costing Results – 3 Year Plan Cost – System-wide (excluding benefits)

Costing Results – 3 Year Plan Cost $7.8M, excluding benefits, for first year cost. This includes: 3% salary increase is modeled at $5.8M. $1.2M for expected FLSA adjustments (assuming a 40 hour work week). $375K per year to get people to minimum of the salary range. $377K for Hard to Fill Adjustment - Biomedical Sciences, Nursing, Precision Production (this is a 5% increase spread evenly over 3 years). A rough guess for compression costing is $2.5 million…   For those employees NOT under the proposed band min I determined their range penetration.  For those with a range penetration of 0-10%, I modeled an increase of 3% for compression.  For those 10-15%, 2%, 15-20%, 1%.  I did this for Staff and Faculty. Range Penetration % Increase Count Total 0 - 10% 3% 1,480 $2,012,547 10 - 15% 2% 340 $320,451 15-20% 1% 309 $137,262 $2,470,260   This includes the 5% Hard-to-Fill budget in the first year.  It was not split out over 3 years.

Costing Results – 3 Year Plan Cost $6.8M, excluding benefits, for the second year cost. This includes: 3% salary increase is modeled at $6M. $375K per year to get people to minimum of the salary range. $377K for Hard to Fill Adjustment - Biomedical Sciences, Nursing, Precision Production (this is a 5% increase spread evenly over 3 years). $7M, excluding benefits, for the third year cost. This includes: 3% salary increase is modeled at $6.2M. A rough guess for compression costing is $2.5 million…   For those employees NOT under the proposed band min I determined their range penetration.  For those with a range penetration of 0-10%, I modeled an increase of 3% for compression.  For those 10-15%, 2%, 15-20%, 1%.  I did this for Staff and Faculty. Range Penetration % Increase Count Total 0 - 10% 3% 1,480 $2,012,547 10 - 15% 2% 340 $320,451 15-20% 1% 309 $137,262 $2,470,260   This includes the 5% Hard-to-Fill budget in the first year.  It was not split out over 3 years.

Costing Results – 3 Year Plan Cost FLSA costing is valid as of 12/1/2016. Compensation and classification recommendations are valid as of 7/1/2017. The cost of salary compression is not included in this model. Compression occurs when someone is hired at a salary equal to or greater than existing employees. A rough guess for compression costing is $2.5 million…   For those employees NOT under the proposed band min I determined their range penetration.  For those with a range penetration of 0-10%, I modeled an increase of 3% for compression.  For those 10-15%, 2%, 15-20%, 1%.  I did this for Staff and Faculty. Range Penetration % Increase Count Total 0 - 10% 3% 1,480 $2,012,547 10 - 15% 2% 340 $320,451 15-20% 1% 309 $137,262 $2,470,260   This includes the 5% Hard-to-Fill budget in the first year.  It was not split out over 3 years.

recommendations HRG recommends: Adopt a Compensation Philosophy. Standardize Policies and Procedures. Implement starting salary algorithm. Develop Career-Pathing to provide employees career growth opportunities. Review Compensation Program annually. Hiring pay algorithm - Successful candidates should receive additional 1% per year above the band minimum up to the midpoint for each year in excess of minimum education and experience requirements they have obtained. Exceptions must be approved by the System HR Director. See policies and procedures recommendations in Backup

recommendations HRG recommends (con’t): Benchmark new jobs periodically to ensure external and internal equity and to maintain structural integrity. Redefine and standardize Supplemental Pay procedures. Centralize job code creation attributes KCTCS System-wide. Conduct further analysis to reduce compression. Fund Under Minimum, FLSA, Hard to Fill Adjustment and Annual Increases. Hiring pay algorithm - Successful candidates should receive additional 1% per year above the band minimum up to the midpoint for each year in excess of minimum education and experience requirements they have obtained. Exceptions must be approved by the System HR Director. See policies and procedures recommendations in Backup