Classification and Compensation Study Project Update - February 27, 2018

Compensation and Classification Study Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) (click link for a printable version)

February 16, 2018

As you know The Singer Group, Inc. has been in the process of conducting a Compensation and Classification study for the Library. The process is now complete and a copy of the study findings and recommendations is available on the Intranet.  We have heard from some of you about the study and the following document has been developed to answer questions that have come up.

The Singer Group consultants will also be onsite February 14th through 16, conducting a series of information sessions for all staff. Please take the time to attend to hear more about the study process, findings, and recommendations. We hope the following set of FAQs will answer any questions you may have.

1)Why was the study conducted?

The last compensation study conducted by the Library was in 2010. Since then there have been many changes to positions. The goal of the study was to ensure that all positions are classified appropriately and that pay is fair and equitable and can support recruitment and retention.

2)Does the recent alignment of positions negatively impact study findings and recommendations?

No, it does not. Adjustments to the study process were made to take into account that staff would be new to their positions during the study. The timeline for the study was pushed out six months to accommodate for this and allow for staff to have more time in their positions before study findings and recommendations became final. Staff were encouraged to share any changes to their positions through the email hotline.

Other sources of input were also utilized in addition to staff input. This included, revised job descriptions (consultants waited until job descriptions were updated to reflect the changes as a result of the alignment), market survey data, and the consultants extensive experience working with library systems.

3)How did you decide which Library jobs would be included in the market survey?

Typically, a survey does not try to obtain salary data for all positions within an organization. This survey included 69 of jobs, comprising 70% of all Library positions.  Jobs included in the survey were identified based on several factors:

• The likelihood of the position to appear in other organizations (for example, if a position is extremely unique and has evolved to fit a specific need at our library and/or is a combination of several types of work, we would not be likely to find such a position to match in the external marketplace)
• Attempting to cover as much of our library population as possible (i.e., jobs that contain many employees, such as access specialist or librarian)
• Representing as many different departments and grade levels as possible, so that the survey does not include all management positions, for instance.
• The length of the survey must also be taken into consideration; Human Resource staff in these other employers must complete the survey, and if it is overly long the participation rate falls.

4)Which positions did you use in the survey - did you use the post-alignment positions, or did you survey our previous positions?

We waited for the alignment to be complete and used your post-alignment positions.  When surveying other organizations we include mini-descriptions of the jobs so we are not matching title to title but description to description. We used the newly revised job descriptions to draft the mini descriptions for the survey. The mini descriptions included a brief summary of the job as well as education and experience requirements.

5)What did the survey find?

We found that overall MLS positions are ahead of the market at all data points surveyed (actual/average pay and at the minimum and maximum of the range). MLS’ positions are more ahead for actual/average salaries paid. Exempt library positions tended to be more ahead of the market than the non-exempt library positions.

6)If the Library is already ahead of the market why were our ranges increased?

Because it has been the philosophy of the library to pay above market many library staff were well into the current ranges. Our recommendation to increase the ranges provides many of these staff an opportunity to continue to grow and not max out in the next few years.

7)Is this new structure fiscally responsible?

A big part of the library’s philosophy is to support retention of high quality library staff. In ensuring people have room to grow, the library is ensuring they are able to retain and continue to reward their high-performing staff. The library is also able to offer very competitive rates when hiring which ensures you are able to attract the best staff. The cost of constant turnover is high and the library has chosen to invest in staff as a way to keep this cost down. The consultants recommend the library does not make a market adjustment to the salary structure until July 2019 and also take a look at the library’s compensation philosophy to lead the market and determine if they want to continue to do so.

8)What changes have been made to the structure?

The number of grades has been increased from 15 to 18. This is to accommodate the additional career ladders created as a result of the alignment. It is also a way to alleviate compression (where staff performing similar work were similarly paid or where there was not enough differentiation between supervisor and staff pay).

9)How were positions placed in the structure?

Position assignments into grades was made based on the following criteria:

1. Market data
2. Internal equity review, we looked at:
   • Supervisory relationships
   • Number and level of staff supervised (degreed vs. non-degreed)
   • Education and experience requirements
   • Complexity and scope – including level of responsibility, decision-making, etc.
   • Overall fit

10)Who made the decisions about which jobs go where?

The consultants determined where positions should be placed in the new structure. This was reviewed by the project managers and library leadership. The placement of positions took into account both internal and external equity of all library jobs.  

11)Did you consider making the access track comparable to the engagement track?

Based on the education and experience requirements and scope for some of the positions, the consultants found there were differences in the levels of positions in each of the tracks.

12)Why are positions that were considered lateral transfers during the alignment process in different grades in the recommended structure?

There are positions within the current structure that mapped to positions that are now in different grades. Positions have been placed within the current grades based on education and experience requirements and the scope of the position. It is our understanding that positions could have been mapped to positions with different scope and requirements, thus changing the position’s grade but that the change in position were considered a lateral transfer.

On the Alignment Project Intranet page is the Alignment Project Questions and Answers, which further details the placement of positions in the alignment process. This information may help clarify some of the decisions made by the consultants when recommending placement into the new structure

13)Has the Commission approved the structure?

The structure was approved by the Commission on February 15, 2018. The submission includes the new structure - the grades and the corresponding pay ranges. The placement of positions within the pay ranges is library procedure.

14)What if I don’t agree with the recommendations for my position?

The consultants have put in place an appeals process for any staff member to request an additional review of their position. Forms may be obtained online on the intranet project page. The Singer Group will review any appeals and the results will be binding (not grievable).

New jobs not currently on our classification structure that may develop will be placed in the appropriate pay range according to market and internal equity.

15)How will the new pay plan affect me?

Your pay will remain the same unless your pay rate is below the minimum of the pay grade to which your position is assigned.  If your salary falls below that minimum, then if the Commission approves the salary structure, your annual salary will be adjusted to the new minimum effective March 12.

Pay for all other positions will remain the same and will not be receiving any other market adjustmentssince all employees received a 2% increase in November 2017.

16)What if someone is not a good performer in their job—does that mean they were put in a lower pay grade?

Remember, the job evaluation process considered the responsibilities of the position, not the capabilities or productivity of the individual performing in the position.  The updated compensation/classification structure reflects the internal and external equity of the positions to MLS regardless of the performance of the individual(s) in the position.

Performance issues, as always, must be dealt with in the framework of our performance development system. 

17)Are a lot of people having their pay increased by moving to the minimum of a new pay grade?

Based on our analysis of current salaries against the new compensation and classification structure, 60 employees will receive a salary increase. 

18)What happens if my salary is above the maximum of the grade?

Performance - Employees at the maximum of their salary range are not eligible for performance increases. However, they are eligible for a performance bonus earned at the rate of 75% of the applicable performance award increase of annual base pay. (SH 400.4 Merit Increase Guide)

Market Adjustment - When an employee’s salary is above the maximum of their new grade they will not be eligible for a market increase until their annual salary falls within the salary range.

19)     What about our benefits?

The Singer Group did not conduct a benefits study as part of this process. The library is considering conducting a benefits study in the near future. The consultants did hear from staff during the project that overall Metro provided good benefits.

For more information about the study process, findings, and recommendations please go to the intranet project page.