Compensation Update
Brandeis University pays competitive base market salaries as part of a total rewards
strategy to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified individuals.
Lori Dougherty
Director of Compensation
December 8, 2009
1
Compensation History
•
•
•
•
•
FY2004 Turnover – Major reason for leaving was identified as a base pay issue.
FY2004 research identified approximately half of Brandeis’ positions as lagging the
market in base pay.
University Adjusted increases were given January 2006, July 2006, January 2007 &
January 2008 resulting in more than $1.3M in adjustments and affecting 392 staff or
approx 35% of the staff population. Increases that were given were based on years of
service in addition to market.
Additionally, 725 new hires since Jan 2006, both replacement and new positions, have
been reviewed so as to hire at current market levels.
As a result of these adjustments our base pay position to market moved to approx
49%.
2
Compensation History
(continued)
Departments whose employees received increases included:




Students & Enrollment
Development
Provost Office – Biology, GSAS, Heller & IBS amongst others
Operating Areas – Finance, Facilities, HR
In an update to the Board of Directors in October 2008, the following points were
summarized:
 University voluntary turnover had improved by 40%
 Pay as a reason for leaving had decreased from 40% of all voluntary
terminations to 5% of voluntary terminations
 Average pay at Brandeis had improved from 8-10% below our peers to less than
1% below our peers.
3
Compensation Today
– Market midpoints are reviewed on an ongoing basis when the position becomes
vacant and at a department manager’s request. The midpoint may be adjusted
according to the results of an external and internal market analysis.
– Local area colleges (BACUS group) serve as one peer comparison group to our
staff positions directly related to Higher Education. Other sources of market data
are reviewed from Educomp (a cross section of colleges and universities across
the US), CUPA, TSG (a local New England regional survey of all types of
businesses) and Mercer.
– Ranges are created around the midpoint with interval ascending range spreads
e.g. an employee in a non-exempt grade 7 might have a range spread of 40%,
an employee in an exempt director level grade E might have a range spread of
60%.
Note: Identified a historical problem of department managers consistently elevating
positions to the next highest level (or higher title) without sufficient justification, in
order to warrant a pay increase instead of working within the current range and
towards the midpoint or fully functional value for that position.
4
Compensation Today (continued)
– A new JDQ form was created and streamlined in order to allow for more thought
in the process of creating job descriptions and details (vs. canned check list).
– Positions are being reviewed relative to each other regardless of the department
e.g. an Associate Director in Mandel is being compared to an Associate Director
level in Cohen center.
Other Compensation activity:
– Merits - With the exception of the unions, employees received no merit increases
for FY2010 (effective 7/1/2009). The merit pool for FY2009 was 4%.
– Adjustments - There were some adjustments and promotional increases given in
FY2009 and to date in FY2010. Promotional increases were 5% on average
compared to previous 10-15% (average 12% for FY2007 & 2008) promotional
increases.
5
Compensation Today (continued)
•
Brandeis’ base pay position to market has continued to improve. As of 12/1/09, the
average of our staff’s base pay is approx at 49% of market. This includes 1112
regular full time & part time staff..
•
As can be expected, there are still employees who are below market midpoint.
Reasons for this include (but are not limited to):
– Hiring an entry level person close to the minimum of range due to the turnover of
a position.
– Employees promoted to a new position are typically positioned below the market
midpoint.
– Existing Research position salary ranges appear to be high for the job duties.
Employees are being compared to the new ranges positioning them below
midpoint.
– Minimal increases have not allowed an employee to “catch up” to midpoint even
though they may be fully functional in their job due to their expertise and length
of service in that same job e.g. Facilities Supervisors.
6
Compensation Today (continued)
•
Reasons positions may be above the market median (but are not limited to):
– Grandfathered employees are overpaid for the job and level e.g. past title
promotions to justify increases
– Research jobs categorized too high for the job duties –some employees have
been moved to this high market position – Heller, Cohen
– Length of service – an employee started high in the range and has been in the
same job for many years so has moved beyond the market midpoint.
7
Compensation in the Future
•
Our base pay position to market is only one section of a total rewards strategy.
Although we may want to consider reviewing groups of positions in the near future
with possible base pay adjustments, we need to be mindful of the total package we
are offering our current staff and how we are marketing to attract outside talent.
•
Should we decide to further review groups of positions and their base pay to market,
recommendations include the Administrative Support Job Family, Non-Union Parking
Monitors, Admissions Counselors and Biology Research Assistants. These
recommendations are based only on anecdotal evidence and further research needs
to occur.
•
We may also consider reviewing job titles and span of control in other departments
8
Compensation in the Future (continued)
The following are ongoing issues we may want to target:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Create detailed, solid and distinguishing criteria for each of the positions and
levels e.g. what makes an Associate director vs. Assistant director?
What happens when someone wants to create yet another management level
and title?
Do we continue to reinforce equity between grant funded and university funded
positions and pay?
Do we start to use bonuses as a way to attract, retain and reward vs. making
adjustments to base pay?
How do we communicate with Management on a regular basis with regards to a
total rewards strategy and goals?
How do we create a performance management system that connects pay to
performance across the University?
9