1. 2011Salary Administration Process ReviewTOM PresentationMay 31, 2011

2. Job Evaluation History Bi-weekly positions: reviewed and graded by peers Exempt positions: reviewed and categorized by HR

3. Goals/Objectives of Compease Involve supervisors Internal & External equity Additional transparency Consistency of evaluation criteria Comparable salary data for all positions (previously 163 positions had no comparable data)

4. Compease Implementation Supervisor graded positions Division head and HR reviewed for equity Supervisor reviewed position grade/salary range with employee

5. Salary Administration Process: Supervisors made recommendations using 2% pool. College level review showed inequities across divisions Division Heads and HR reallocated 2% pool to address CompaRatio’s under 90% Pools ranged from 1.75% to 2.25% (approx)

6. Salary Administration Process: CR’s below 90= calc up to 90% CR’s 90-110 = 2% CR’s between 110-120 = 1% CR’s above 120= 0% Divisional discretionary pool administered based on supervisor’s recommendations and internal equity

7. Campus CompaRatio’s (before and after increases)

8. Next Steps for Supervisor’s Review salary adjustment(s) with employees (esp. if + or - 2%) Communicate process Share all aspects of employee’s grade and range Contact HR if you have questions

9. Summary Small pool for salary increases Focused on CR’s under 90% Great process was made Priorities for next year have not been set

10. Any Questions?