Staff Compensation Program – Phase 2 Internal Equity Adjustments October 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
University of Waterloo Staff Compensation June 2002.
Advertisements

Town Hall Presentation January 9-10, 2002 Curtis Powell Vice President for Human Resources The Division of Human Resources and William M. Mercer, Incorporated.
1 Market Pricing Organizations seek to offer market based pay rates in order to attract and retain competent employees There are two basic methods to recognize.
1 The Road to Merit Pay Merit Pay Workshop August 2013 Office of Human Resources 1.
1 Career Banding Education Sessions. 2 Welcome Career Banding Overview Administrative Process WCU Implementation Process and Timeline Introduction of.
Symposium on SALARY POLICY, SALARY SCALES, SALARY STRUCTURE
Values and At Our Best tools to guide us Collaboration – We work together Integrity – We build confidence and trust in all interactions.
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
Pay For Performance: Managing Pay Systems Across Organizations
MGMT Managing Employee Reward Systems Salary Structures Purpose and Goals –establish series of grades to classify jobs according to similar worth.
Current Issues in Human Resources & Benefits Judy Boyette Associate Vice President Academic Business Officers Conference April 4, 2005.
Building Human Capital OS352 HRM Fisher January 12, 2005.
Staff Compensation Program Update
Introduction of Total Rewards & Implementation of Market Pay Zones Presented by: UMHS Compensation 5/15/08.
Position Questionnaire Supervisor Training ND Renew Agenda  Overview  Objectives  Supervisor Role and Responsibilities  Position Questionnaire.
Staff Compensation Program Update
Compensation Model Supervisor Training Presented by: Jennifer Larson
Oklahoma State University Human Resources 106 Whitehurst (405) THE JOURNEY.
Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Structure & Administration
Total Rewards and Compensation
Competitive Market Compensation Review July 2009 Project Overview.
What is the Global Grading Project
PUSD Compensation Project Overview Governing Board Meeting March 14, 2013.
© 2007 Hay Acquisition Company I, Inc. All Rights Reserved. State Employee Compensation Oversight Commission Compensation Plan Design October 15, 2007.
Pay, Compensation and Benefits
Erin Packwood 2005 Competitive Compensation Review Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) January 17, 2006.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Program Employee Presentation 2013.
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
1 ACC FY07 Classification and Compensation Study.
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT MIHE Mashal Institute of Higher Education.
COMPREHENSIVE REFORM TRANSPARENCY, FAIRNESS AND OBJECTIVITY RESPONSIVENESS AND AGILITY BASIC PRINCIPLES.
Human resources reform: a people strategy for IFAD Liz Davis Director, Human Resources Division 8-9 July th Replenishment.
Position Questionnaire Employee Training ND Renew Agenda  Overview  Objectives  Completing the Position Questionnaire  Individual  Validating.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 7-1 Compensating Employees 7.
Compensating Employees Definition Objective Bases Types Determining Reward Job Evaluation Compensation Structure.
Texas A& M University Central Texas Staff Salary Study Process February 25, 2014.
Establishing Strategic Pay Plans
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
The University of Texas at San Antonio June 19, 2013 Merit Policy.
P AY DELIVERY ADMINISTRATION Jayendra Rimal. I NTRODUCTION Employees develop an unique view of the relationship between pay and assigned job, pay and.
Agenda Review Major Changes from January 8 Presentation of Draft Preliminary Results Review Final Recommendations Other Progress to Date  
HR Practices For I/T Success. THIS REPORT PRESENTS I/S HUMAN RESOURCE PRACTICE RESEARCH FINDINGS WITH THE FOLLOWING OBJECTIVE Understand HR practices.
1 Components Preparation  Traditional higher education  Alternative certification  District-based preparation Sourcing  Marketing  Recruitment  Screening.
TOTAL REWARDS ANNUAL ACTION ITEM #2. 2 AGENDA  Purpose of the Presentation  Our Approach  Total Rewards Philosophy Review  Compensation- Current State/Future.
Compensation Study Preliminary Results Overview Presented by: CBIZ Human Capital Services October 26, 2015.
Human Resources Strategy
Copyright © 2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Compensation Study Preliminary Results Presented by: CBIZ Human Capital Services January 11, 2016.
Creating a Salary Structure 101
Human Resources Department Bridget Paris, Compensation Specialist Work Session July 7, 2011.
A merit-based salary program for non-represented employees EMPLOYEE PRESENTATION.
Discussion on Compensation. Goal To assist in securing and retaining a staff of necessary quality to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization.
City of Galveston Classification & Compensation Study Discussion Preliminary Findings and Recommendations.
New Mexico Highlands University
Welcome to the Winner’s Circle! Trends in Healthcare Compensation Arkansas Healthcare Human Resources Association April 1, 2016.
FY2017 Market Program Overview Manager Sessions. 2 Agenda Market Program Refresher FY2017 Market and New Hire Minimum Overview Key Messages and Next Steps.
BROADBANDING. OVERVIEW GOALS/OBJECTIVES Decentralize compensation management & administration Reduce the need for reclassification reviews and improve.
Management Advisory Group, Inc. Executive Summary City of Fairfax Compensation and Classification Study July 1, 2016.
Feedback/Performance Review and Compensation Process
MANAGING HUMAN RESOURCES
Overview Background UPS Operational Policy TC 4
Office of Human Resources
Career Banding Program for North Carolina State Government Employees
Employee Performance Management System
Pay Structure Chapter 9 HRM-300.
Agenda • Introductions • Project Objectives • Project Steps
LUHR Compensation Program.
Presentation transcript:

Staff Compensation Program – Phase 2 Internal Equity Adjustments October 2005

Today’s Agenda Background Information Methodology Process Implementation

Staff Employment Value Strategy Salary levels that are competitive with Lehigh’s competition in the marketplace Cash based rewards for performance Benefits that are equitable and competitive Career opportunities for employees Professional development that is aligned with department goals and University’s strategic plan Work that is interesting and engaging Affiliation with a nationally recognized university

 Implement Market Referenced Job Evaluation Program (1/1/05)  Develop process to address internal equity concerns  Develop Job Family Accountability and Skill Guides  Establish Job Family Career Development Resource Guides  January Equity Adjustments  Performance Management  Complete alignment of training and staff development with SEVS  Complete comprehensive benefits allocation review  January Equity Adjustments  Complete Job Family Accountability and Skill Guides  Complete Job Family Career Development Resource Guides  Begin comprehensive benefits allocation review  Begin alignment of training and staff development with SEVS Our Timeline  Develop Staff Compensation Program

Staff Compensation Program Phase 1 – External Equity Assign positions to salary grades that mirror the pay rates found in the job families and labor markets in which Lehigh competes Phase 2 – Internal Equity Determine appropriate position in range for individual staff members

Market Referenced Program The market for each job family determines the salary grade, and knowledge, skills, experience, and performance determine position in range. Job Role, Responsibilities and Skill Requirements Salary Grade Knowledge, Skills, Experience and Performance Recommended Base Salary Position in Range +=

Determining Position in Range What factors contribute to a recommendation of position in range? Knowledge, Skills, Experience Overall Measure Performance Position in RangeIndividual Measure +=

Possible Approaches Set targets based on years of service – or years in position Set targets based on performance appraisal ratings for the current year – or the last five years Set targets based on individual competencies Etc.

Back to the Bank -- Compare 2 Customer Service Managers (CSM) – Who should earn more? JaneSue Hire DateJanuary 2000September 1990 Position HistoryCSM since January 2000CSM since April Teller from January 1990 until March Performance Appraisal Rated as “Outstanding” by an easy rater Rated as “Meets Expectations” by tough rater (new supervisor) 5 year performance history 2004 Outstanding 2003 Outstanding 2002 Above Average 2001 Above Average 2000 Meets Expectations 2004 Meets Expectations 2003 Above Average 2002 Above Average 2001 Outstanding 2000 Outstanding

Based on Hire Date -- Who should earn more? JaneSue Hire DateJanuary 2000September 1990

Based on Position History Who should earn more? JaneSue Position HistoryCSM since January 2000CSM since April Teller from January 1990 until March 2004

Based on the 2004 Appraisal Who should earn more? JaneSue 2004 Performance Appraisal Rated as “Outstanding” by an easy rater Rated as “Meets Expectations” by tough rater (new supervisor)

Based on 5 years of Performance -- Who should earn more? JaneSue 5 year performance history 2004 Outstanding 2003 Outstanding 2002 Above Average 2001 Above Average 2000 Meets Expectations 2004 Meets Expectations 2003 Above Average 2002 Above Average 2001 Outstanding 2000 Outstanding ?

Who should earn more? JaneSue Hire DateJanuary 2000September 1990 Position HistoryCSM since January 2000CSM since April Teller from January 1990 until March Performance Appraisal Rated as “Outstanding” by an easy rater Rated as “Meets Expectations” by tough rater (new supervisor) 5 year performance history 2004 Outstanding 2003 Outstanding 2002 Above Average 2001 Above Average 2000 Meets Expectations 2004 Meets Expectations 2003 Above Average 2002 Above Average 2001 Outstanding 2000 Outstanding ?

And, what about? Individual competencies Educational background Total work experience before the bank Etc.

What criteria are valid?

Lehigh’s Criteria Time in Position and Classification Performance history as supported by merit increases rather than appraisal rating

How to set the targets? Fixed percentages or dollar amounts for each year in the position and classification Ranges of salary targets for each year in the position and classification Fixed percentages or dollar amounts for relative merit adjustments

And what are those amounts? How should we determine the percentages or dollar amounts? What should they be based on?

Building a Model The equity model was developed in consultation with University leadership over the spring and summer. We needed answers to these two questions: What do we want to accomplish with the equity adjustments? Where will we find the appropriate salary values to use in building the model?

Our Goal – To define an appropriate salary for each staff member based on time in role and individual performance

Our salary change measures: Lehigh’s actual staff salary budget history since 1989.

An Example – Back to the Bank JaneSue Hire DateJanuary 2000September 1990 Position HistoryCSM since January 2000CSM since April Teller from January 1990 until March Performance Appraisal Rated as “Outstanding” by an easy rater Rated as “Meets Expectations” by tough rater (new supervisor) 5 year performance history 2004 Outstanding 2003 Outstanding 2002 Above Average 2001 Above Average 2000 Meets Expectations 2004 Meets Expectations 2003 Above Average 2002 Above Average 2001 Outstanding 2000 Outstanding

New Salary Program at the Bank Effective January 1, 2005: CSM positions assigned to Grade 3A Salary range for Grade 3A: $30,000 to $48,000 Jane and Sue have salaries increased to the range minimum of $30,000

Setting salary targets for CSMs The bank will use their own salary budget history over the last 5 years to determine appropriate salary targets for the Customer Service Managers.

The Bank’s Salary Budget History Year Range Movement Salary Adj. Budget %3.5% %3.5% %4.0% %3.0% %3.5%

The Bank’s Salary Growth Year Range Movement Salary Adj. Budget Salary Growth within Range %3.5%2.0% %3.5%1.5% %4.0%2.0% %3.0%1.5% %3.5%2.0%

Moving through a range MinimumMaximum MinimumMaximum MinimumMaximum MinimumMaximum Average salary of all Grade 3A employees hired in 2002 At Minimum 3.53% over minimum 2% over minimum 5.6% over minimum

The 2002 Hiring Class

Target for 2002 Hiring Class

Developing Salary Targets for All Year in Position Budget Year Total Growth Over Time Salary Target %$30, %$31, %$31, %$32, %$32,790 Assume Salary Grade Minimum of $30,000

Targets for Sue and Jane Year in Position Budget Year Total Growth Over Time Salary Target %$30, %$31, %$31, %$32, %$32,790 Assume Salary Grade Minimum of $30,000 Target for Jane Target for Sue

What a Target Represents The salary target represents the average salary that would be paid to all individuals in the salary grade who were hired in the same year. It does not represent the salary that each individual employee should earn.

Determining Salaries Jane and Sue both paid $30,000 at 1/1/05 Step 1 – Targets from HR Target for Sue = $30,600 (+/-) for performance Target for Jane = $32,790 (+/-) for performance Step 2 – Salary Determined by Branch Manager Salary for Sue = $30,300 Salary for Jane = $33,500

Setting Salary Targets at Lehigh Applying the Bank Example

Our Goal – To define an appropriate salary for each staff member based on time in role and individual performance

Our salary change measures: Lehigh’s actual staff salary budget history since 1989.

Setting the Targets Targets for individual staff member salaries are determined based on: Length of time in position and classification Actual potential for salary growth since assuming that position and classification

Setting the Salaries Department Heads and Stem Leadership will set actual salaries. They will consider: Targets provided by HR Employee performance history as evidenced by actual merit increases received

The Process at Lehigh Confirmation of position and classification dates by supervisors and staff Development of targets by HR Determination of salaries by area leadership and department heads Communication of salary changes to staff