Agenda Review Major Changes from January 8 Presentation of Draft Preliminary Results Review Final Recommendations Other Progress to Date  

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

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.
Hubbard County, Minn. Classification and Compensation Study Update GREG MANGOLD| AUGUST 5, 2014.
Compensation & Classification Study Brevard Public Schools Compensation & Classification Study Brevard Public Schools July 17, 2007 Employee Orientations.
Non-Bargaining Compensation Brevard Public Schools.
A Presentation on the Management and Curriculum Audit for the Guam Public School System April 14, 2009.
1 Miami Dade College Reclassification Study Facilities Presented by the Division of Human Resources February 2007.
Market Based Pay System The Market Based Pay System Project.
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
Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study Summary Findings
Staff Compensation Program Update
1 Strategic Staffing & Compensation Your NU Values Partner … “Committed to understanding and delivering value-added customer service that contributes to.
No 1 REVIEW OF ACADEMIC STRUCTURE PROPOSED GENERAL STAFF STRUCTURE 3 June 2008.
Stronge Leader Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Structure & Administration
Library Faculty Market Equity – Nuts and Bolts - Welcome - Betsy Simpson Chair, Cataloging and Metadata University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
© 2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved. Salary Survey Report January 30, 2007 State of Kansas.
Competitive Market Compensation Review July 2009 Project Overview.
What is the Global Grading Project
PUSD Compensation Project Overview Governing Board Meeting March 14, 2013.
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.
Erin Packwood 2005 Competitive Compensation Review Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) January 17, 2006.
© 2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved. Review of Unclassified Pay Plan February 1, 2007 State of New Hampshire.
Staff Compensation Program – Phase 2 Internal Equity Adjustments October 2005.
Scope of the Study To merge the pay plans of the PTCOG and NWPCOG and to produce an Assignment of Classes to Grades for the new organization effective.
0 Module 2.3: Personnel Implications. 1 In this module, we’ll address several key areas. What are the proposed class specifications? How do they compare.
Non-Academic Staff Compensation Program Employee Presentation 2013.
2005 Supervisory and Professional Salary Survey Final Report September 14, 2005.
1 ACC FY07 Classification and Compensation Study.
Classification & Compensation Study Outside firm (BCC) was hired to perform: Classification Study Internal Equity Pay equity compliance Study.
Compensation Project Faculty & Staff Compensation Programs Board of Regents Finance Committee Meeting Project Overview
Collective Bargaining Retreat for Management Discussion of the Impact of Measuring Teacher and Leader Effectiveness on Collective Bargaining August 17,
© 2015 Texas Association of School Boards, Inc. All rights reserved. January 29, 2015 Presented by: Ann R. Patton Managing Compensation Consultant Compensation.
JOB EVALUATION & SALARY STRUCTURE DESIGN
-09/06/13, - Page 1 The Ohio State University - Classification and Compensation Talking Points - CONFIDENTIAL – for internal use only -  Compensation.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Regrade the ten classifications found to be 20 percent or more below market midpoint to be in alignment with the market.
MAG Management Advisory Group, Inc.
Compensation Management. Compensation Employee compensation – refers to extrinsic and intangible rewards. – refers to all forms of pay or rewards going.
Bruce Tingle, CCP and Michelle Karr, CCP UTSA. 29,000 students Second largest University in UT System 800 full time faculty 2,500 staff employees Annual.
Compensation Study Preliminary Results Overview Presented by: CBIZ Human Capital Services October 26, 2015.
Job Classification and Compensation Study Midwestern State University [date] Presented by:
Copyright © 2015 by The Segal Group, Inc. All rights reserved. STAFF CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY Compensation Philosophy and Comparison Market.
Compensation Plan May 11, Strategic Goal II: Northwest ISD will recruit, develop, retain, and recognize an exceptional, highly motivated.
Administrator-Association Collaboration-from MOUs to Problem-solving SIOUX CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Agenda Study Process Outreach Summary Salary Quartile Analysis
Compensation Study Preliminary Results Presented by: CBIZ Human Capital Services January 11, 2016.
Human Resources Department Bridget Paris, Compensation Specialist Work Session July 7, 2011.
Standards of Achievement for Professional Advancement District 2 Career Ladder Training April 29, 2016 Ronda Alexander & Michael Clawson.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Discussion on Compensation. Goal To assist in securing and retaining a staff of necessary quality to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization.
Town of Carolina Beach Executive Summary for the Town Council Classification and Pay Study March 2015.
City of Galveston Classification & Compensation Study Discussion Preliminary Findings and Recommendations.
New Mexico Highlands University
Building Market- Competitive Compensation Systems MGT 4543 Compensation Management Chapter 7.
Compensation and Classification Study for Alachua County BOCC, Sheriff, Property Appraiser, and Supervisor of Elections Offices, FL 1 March 2016 Results.
Compensation and Classification Study for Midwestern State University April 29, 2015 Presentation of Results.
Management Advisory Group, Inc. Executive Summary City of Fairfax Compensation and Classification Study July 1, 2016.
About the Study 1 Summary 2 Market Study Results 3 Recommendations 4.
Project Objectives and Scope Project Work Plan
New Hanover County Schools
Compensation Program Update
Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study Summary Findings
Job Evaluation Salary Administration Program
Workforce Development Goal
Presentation transcript:

Classification and Compensation Plan Update for Suffolk Public Schools, VA Introduction Presentation of Final Results February 12, 2015

Agenda Review Major Changes from January 8 Presentation of Draft Preliminary Results Review Final Recommendations Other Progress to Date  

Major Updates Three New Recommendations One New Phase – Phase 4 Overall Costs About the Same (↓ ~$5,000)  

Major Updates (Cont.) Recommendation 1: Classification of Buyer Removed as Position Phased Out; Reduced Cost Recommendation 2: Employees Recommended for Technology Technician Levels; Added Cost Recommendation 3: No Changes Recommendation 4: Maintenance of the Plan; No Changes Recommendation 5: New Recommendation but Included in Scope; No Cost  

Major Updates (Cont.) Recommendation 6: Custodian 10-Month Added and Coordinator and Director Level Positions Removed; Reduced Cost Recommendation 7: Maintenance of the Plan; No Changes Recommendation 8: New Recommendation to Address Correlation Between Years of Experience and Step; No Cost Recommendation 9: New Recommendation to Address Coordinator and Director Level Positions 10-20% Below Market; Costs Shifted From Previous Recommendation 6. Also Revised Recommended Pay Grade for Director of Elementary Leadership  

Recommendations Nine Total Recommendations to Address Compensation and Classification Findings Preliminary Implementation Costs Calculated for Each Recommendation; 5 have Associated Costs Recommendations Designed to Bring SPS to Market Suggested that all Recommendations be Implemented at the Same Time because Market Data has a Shelf-Life Up from six Two new added with costs, costs for one of these has been shifted from another rec based on SPS priority

Recommendations Recommendation 1: Regrade the ten classifications found to be 20 percent or more below market midpoint to be in alignment with the market. Annual Implementation Cost: $59,429.70

Recommendations Recommendation 2: Reclassify ten support positions to better reflect roles and responsibilities, and align with best practice. Annual Implementation Cost: $18,552.60

Recommendations Recommendation 3: Address inconsistencies in step progression found throughout the Teacher Scale as well as market competitiveness by adopting a revised Teacher Scale. Annual Implementation Cost: $3,886,005 PRELIMINARY COSTS

Recommendations Recommendation 4: Review the Support and Teacher Scales each year to determine if adjustments are needed based on the average movement of relevant local peer pay levels, and conduct a small survey of select classifications on an annual basis to determine if adjustments are required to remain competitive. Annual Implementation Cost: $0

Recommendations Recommendation 5: Conduct an in-depth review of contract classification compensation to determine if contract classifications are being appropriately compensated. Annual Implementation Cost: $0

Recommendations Recommendation 6: Regrade the 31 classifications found to be between 10 and 20 percent below market midpoint, as well as the Middle School Principal and High School Assistant Principal classifications to maintain internal equity. Annual Implementation Cost: $680,455.40

Recommendations Recommendation 7: Conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation study every five to seven years. Annual Implementation Cost: $0

Recommendations Recommendation 8: Conduct an in-depth analysis of the correlation between years of experience and placement within the salary structure. Annual Implementation Cost: $0

Recommendations Recommendation 9: : Regrade the six Coordinator and Director classifications found to be between 10 and 20 percent or more below market midpoint to be in alignment with the market, as well as the Director of Secondary Leadership classification to maintain internal equity. Annual Implementation Cost: $64,211.40

Recommendations Alternative Implementation Approach: Four Phased Approach for Implementing Recommendations Phase Recommendations Cost Phase 1 Recommendations 1- 5 $3,963,987 Phase 2 Recommendation 6 $680,455 Phase 3 Recommendation 7 & 8 $0 Phase 4 Recommendation 9 $64,211

Conclusion Total Implementation Costs: $4,708,654 Suffolk Public Schools current system is below market. Evergreen Solutions’ recommendations bring SPS to market. Implementation of the new structure will: Improve the internal equity of positions and the ability to compete for and retain dedicated, valued employees; Compensate employees taking into consideration internal and external equity; Allow for flexibility in its administration; and Provide ample room for salary growth within the ranges.   Costs reduced only slightly, about $5,000. Of the total $4.7 million cost, approx. 82.5 percent is for addressing teacher salaries. Clearly setting a teacher-centered priority for SPS.

Next Steps Provide Revised Job Descriptions Develop Solution Database Develop Compensation and Classification Plan for 2015-16 1. Update the current version of the SPS Classification and Compensation Plan and provide it in a format that is acceptable to the school board.    2. Placement of internal and external candidates on the scale 3. Fair Labor Standards Act status (exempt vs non-exempt)

Thank you! Questions? Tom Masters Manager Evergreen Solutions, LLC tomm@consultevergreen.com 850-459-9872