“M’s at McGill: Current status, concerns, salary policy, and future directions” Prof. Anthony C. Masi, Provost McGill University Management Forum 2007 New Residence Hall Ballroom 27 November 2007

M-staff:  increase of 291 positions (31.2%)  “term positions” increased by only 11, from 284 to 295 (3.9%) over the same period  “total growth” in administrative and support staff: 2853 to 3398, or 545 positions (19.1%)  much faster growth than “academic renewal”  net growth of tenure-track staff from 2003 to 2007: 1394 to 1571 or 12.7%  students increased by only 4.3% ,0331,0981,1751,224

1. support for the mission of the University 2. front-line, back-office: services orientation 3. integral element of McGill’s strategic plans Why this growth in “M’s”?

 communications  career development  management skills  leadership  performance dialogue  salary policy Issues of concern

 M’s need mechanisms for involvement in McGill’s strategic thinking  white paper  student life and learning  master plan  campaign McGill  M’s need to be more involved in and more informed about the development of “policies”  M-Forum and other venues Communications

 opportunities to develop skills, duties, and responsibilities  measuring competencies and contributions  programs and tools  access, relevance, impact  vertical and horizontal moves  backfill, backup and succession planning Career development

 people  resources  projects  managing-up  managing-down  peer relationships Management skills

 understanding context  seeing what others do not  integrating materials  building teams  execution, results, delivery  mentoring Leadership

 setting goals and expectations  measuring outcomes and achievements  establishing priorities  planning strategies  adaptability, flexibility, with focus  dealing with stress  collegiality  discussing assessments and opportunities Performance dialogue

 goals: equity, fair play, and transparency  several years of budget deficits but no cuts, until this fiscal year  MELS: requirement to balance deficit in short term  Board of Governors: requirement to develop plan for repaying debt in medium term  FY  first year of budget cuts, in the form of re-allocations, totalling over $9M, but no reductions in staff Salary policy 1

 for academics: competitiveness with McGill’s peer institutions in Canada (and in consultation with MAUT)  Principal Shapiro (be at or above the median of the G-10)  Principal Munroe-Blum (be among the top 4 in the G-13)  for M’s: competitiveness in the local labour market (and consultation with staff association)  for unionised staff: consistency with previous settlements in collective agreement and based on mandatory negotiations Salary policy 2

 academic salary policy at 5.8% is “all in”:  minimum increase (1.35%)  merit (3.35%)  Subtotal (comparable to M salary policy): 4.7%  retentions, anomalies, equity issues (0.6%)  promotional increases (0.4%)  professional development allowances and “Faculty club” salary diversion indexation (0.1%) Salary policy 3

 M’s salary policy, 2.5%, contains:  minimum increase (1.35%)  merit (1.15%)  but, for M’s the University picks up, “off-policy”:  professional development costs (0.5%)  promotional increases, reclassifications, equity issues (1.5%)  index for “Summer Flex-days” (0.004%)  if calculated as “academic policy” = 4.50% Salary policy 4

 McGill difference is comparable to other Quebec universities for FY :  faculty increases ranged from 4% to 5%  administrative and support staff increases ranged from 2% to 3% Salary policy 5

 external “drivers” of salary policy decisions:  historical trends (where possible)  “co-operative wage survey” (others tell us and we tell them)  research on public sector and relevant private sector wage settlements (as indicated in data from Statistics Canada quarterly)  quarterly wage settlements for Quebec public service 2006 (average 2.1%):  average across 4 “similar” sectors for 2006: 2.4% Salary policy 6 Q1Q2Q3Q4 2.1%1.8%1.7%2.7%

 McGill’s position for academics has failed to keep up with the comparators or the principles of the Principals  barely 5 th among the original G-10, 7 th among the G-13  yet, performance indicators such as Maclean’s and the “Times Higher Education Supplement” place us at the top of Canada’s universities  recruitment and retention are major issues for faculty  external hires into McGill create new pressures on salary expectations for current faculty  equity considerations based on matching offers for those recruited away from McGill Salary policy 7

staff development and training –leadership development program –organisational development function –HR presence and support in the community –HR to partner with units and work teams “M” HR Objectives 1

review and enhance recognition programs –years of service recognition (Lapel Pin Program) –quarter century ceremony –Principal’s awards –creating an endowment to fund these in perpetuity “M” HR Objectives 2

M compensation: –define McGill’s total compensation philosophy (aligned with the University’s goals, objectives, and strategies) –review M compensation structure to ensure its alignment with philosophy and goals –determine positioning within reference market(s) to ensure competitiveness in attracting and retaining best talent public sector in Quebec (and Canada?) universities and non-profit organisations in Quebec large Montreal employers in “similar” sectors “M” HR Objectives 3a

determine components of total compensation –base salary –incentive/variable pay –emphasis on “pay for performance” (merit) –review the merit model and its implementation ensure salary scales reflect competitive positioning “M” HR Objectives 3b

provide in-depth analysis, engage in consultations, and develop recommendations for FY and beyond –compensation programs –structures –processes develop a multi-year model for M and academic salary policies “M” HR Objectives 3c

 M staff at McGill:  valuable and valued colleagues  contributors to McGill’s success  but their direct comparators for compensation and salary policy are not tenure track faculty Conclusion 1

 institutional commitment  consult earlier and broadly on design of salary (and other) policies  continue to be transparent about the “drivers”, indicators, and rationales  provide accurate and timely data on market comparators  communicate on all issues, but especially salary policy, more effectively Conclusion 2

 Provost’s commitment  “clear understandings make for long friendships”  within the constraints just outlined:  do what can be done to recognise, morally and materially, the dedication, loyalty, contributions, hard work, and achievements of M staff at McGill  Thank you for inviting me to address M- Forum, for you time, and your attention! Conclusion 3

Do you have questions for my answers?