1 / 39

Trends in Public Sector Compensation

Trends in Public Sector Compensation. Presentation to the Colorado Municipal League February 8, 2008 Bruce Lawson, Partner & Annette Hoefer, Senior Consultant Fox Lawson & Associates, LLC. About Fox Lawson & Associates. Compensation and classification solutions for the government

emerald
Download Presentation

Trends in Public Sector Compensation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Trends in Public Sector Compensation Presentation to the Colorado Municipal League February 8, 2008 Bruce Lawson, Partner & Annette Hoefer, Senior Consultant Fox Lawson & Associates, LLC

  2. About Fox Lawson & Associates • Compensation and classification solutions for the government • 20+ years of experience • Nationwide clients • Leading edge methods • Practical solutions • www.foxlawson.com • blawson@foxlawson.com, 602-840-1070 • ahoefer@foxlawson.com, 319-377-3771 2

  3. Topics • Trends in the Colorado public sector • National trends in public sector compensation • Opportunities and pitfalls for each trend • Open Discussion 3

  4. Colorado Trends • Significant changes in the last decade • Economic driven • Before: Mountain view was worth a tradeoff in salary • Now: High cost of living area and significant growth • Comparison with US • 4Q ERI: 98.1 with the State as the base • 4Q ERI: 92.9 with Denver as the base 4

  5. Colorado Trends • Public Sector Challenges • TABOR • Public sector slowed for a few years after 9/11 • Some recent budget crunches • Cities appear to be hurt more than counties • Public sector initiated change in pay systems 5

  6. Colorado Trends • Market Driven Pay • Movement away from internal equity driven systems • Market has become primary in establishing job hierarchy and pay structures • Greater access to public sector data • Data sharing • Availability of local surveys • Movement away from COLA as primary factor in pay budgets 6

  7. Colorado Trends • Market Driven Pay • Consideration given for private sector • Focus is primarily on other public sector organizations • Keep up with other Public Sector organizations • Has caused a spiraling effect on wages in the past 7

  8. Colorado Trends • Pay for Performance • Elected Official initiative • Reduce entitlement mentality • Increase performance • Put limited pay dollars toward the best performers • Not funding old step systems • Focus on keeping ranges competitive 8

  9. Colorado Trends • Managers and Employees are conflicted • Market adjustment should be automatic, instead of earned • No one wants to be a “Meets” performer • Still focused on range maximum • Compression issues are prevalent • Use other means for increasing individual pay • Employees becoming more vocal about pay • Varying degrees of success • Continuing interest/emphasis on making PFP work 9

  10. National Public Sector Trends • Four Significant Trends • Pay for Performance • Market Based Pay Structures • Resolution of Pay Compression • Broader Ranges 10

  11. Pay for Performance (PFP) • Hottest compensation item on the agenda of: • Elected Officials • Management and Administrators • Employees • Unions • Much larger impact nationwide 11

  12. PFP-Basic Message • Those that perform should be rewarded • Policy makers are tired of increasing the pay for those that are not contributing • Desire to control costs 12

  13. PFP-Pitfalls • Process is subjective • Managers are not trained to: • Set realistic goals • Evaluate Performance • Distinguish different levels of performance • Convey the message to employees • Are managers capable and committed? 13

  14. PFP-More Pitfalls • Belief that many existing pay systems are below market • Managers (who are also employees) and employees believe that any money available should go to employees to “keep them whole” • Managers are in a conflicted situation • Employees support them to get their work done • Organizations don’t know how to manage employee pay movement 14

  15. PFP-Still More Pitfalls • Budgets are set after performance is demonstrated--sets up a potential “gotcha” • Zero sum game--for someone to win, another has to lose • Contrary to public sector perspective • Managers believe that ALL of their employees are performing above average • County found that 90+% of their employees’ performance was rated “exceptional” • Manager’s fail to take action on low performers 15

  16. PFP-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Get employees, managers and elected officials involved in the design • Develop a process that is simple, job specific and multidimensional • Do not assume that you can measure everything in exact detail 16

  17. PFP-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Train, counsel, coach employees, managers and everyone else in its use • Test the plan • Hold managers responsible for good evaluations • Audit the results every year • Plan on redesign • Do not get hung up on the form--it is the process that is important! 17

  18. PFP-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Measure objective goals tied to job (The Ends) • Measure competencies (The Means) • Weight objective goals higher than competencies in the final evaluation score • Set up a small number of performance levels • Expect and enforce the performance distribution 18

  19. PFP-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Provide for two pay mechanisms • A small amount for general increases • An additional amount for top performers • Budget the amount before the performance year, not after 19

  20. PFP-Results • Uneven results • Private and public organizations both have difficulty in making the systems work • But few want to abandon the idea that it could work 20

  21. PFP-Alternatives • Spot awards for top performance • Gainsharing or goal sharing • Rare in Colorado • Skill based pay 21

  22. Market Based Pay • Pay structures that reflect the market • Consistent with use of broadband pay models • Desire to get away from internal pay adjustments • Requires more frequent assessment of market data 22

  23. Market Pay-Basic Message • We pay at the market rate • We will adjust pay based on the market 23

  24. Market Pay-Pitfalls • Very few really want to pay at the market forever • Markets move up, down and sideways • If you follow the market, then some job families will move ahead faster than others, and some may even go down 24

  25. Market Pay-Pitfalls • Government pay philosophies will normally not allow this much disruption in their pay systems • Internal equity is still a very powerful force 25

  26. Market Pay-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Organize jobs by job families • Organize job families into occupational groups • Assess market every year • By job family • By occupational group 26

  27. Market Pay-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Blend internal ranking of jobs with market data • Pay a market contingency for market sensitive jobs rather than adjusting base pay 27

  28. Pay Compression • When a more experienced employee is paid less than a less experienced employee in the same job • Caused by lack of pay movement within the pay range • Caused by new hires starting at a higher rate than existing employee • Caused by too many levels within a pay structure 28

  29. Pay Compression • Caused by lack of pay policy guidelines • Caused by pay ranges that are not keeping up with the market • Caused by across the board increases • Caused by flat dollar increases for all employees 29

  30. Pay Compression-Pitfalls • Poor employee morale • Generates unneeded and unjustified reclassification requests • Causes some turnover 30

  31. Pay Compression-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Move employees faster than the range movement • Keep pay ranges consistent with the competitive market • Pay policy guidelines to pay new hires in the appropriate salary range • Reduce future issues 31

  32. Pay Compression-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Bite the bullet--adjust pay compression • Reduce number of job classes and levels • Develop pay structures where midpoints/job rates of ranges are at least 8% apart • Allow for in-range adjustments up to the job rate/midpoint • Don’t adjust the ranges each year, but allow employees to move in the range 32

  33. Pay Compression-Alternatives • Special pay structures • i.e. IT pay structures • Engineering pay structures • Police and Fire pay structures • Found in many Colorado municipalities 33

  34. Broader Ranges • Salary ranges of 50-100% width • Colorado has increased pay range width • Classification descriptions need to be broader • Requires a different job evaluation system • Requires different assessment of the market • Requires range movement policies 34

  35. Why Broader Ranges? • More managerial flexibility in assignments without constant reclassifications • Recognize individual contributions • Reward performance 35

  36. Broader Range-Pitfalls • Takes some “control” of salary growth away from HR and places it with managers • Managers may not be capable of handling new freedom • Difficult to determine the correct pay level of job 36

  37. Broader Range-Pitfall Avoidance Strategies • Establish ranges based on job families • Establish practices to govern job growth and pay growth • Performance • Skill enhancement • Competency growth • Link survey data to place in range based on “range of consideration” 37

  38. Future Trends • Struggle to get Pay for Performance right • Desire for progressive compensation methods • How to handle traditional public sector perspectives • Unions 38

  39. Trends • Discussion 39

More Related