Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study 2012-2013 Summary Findings BROWARD COLLEGE Fox, Lawson & Associates Compensation Study 2012-2013 Summary Findings

Strategic goal 4 Enhance the College’s Strategic Human Capital and Competitive Advantage by Recruiting, Developing and Retaining Diverse and Talented Faculty, Staff and Administrative Leaders whose Primary Focus will be to Promote Student Success and Support Lifelong Learning for All Students Hire best in the marketplace As part of this Goal 4 initiative, a comprehensive compensation study was conducted inclusive of faculty, administrators, and professional staff The College will offer a competitive compensation package to attract and retain top applicants and employees The College strives to be competitive with the local market and education institutions

Study Summary findings Salary Data collection from the following sources: CUPA Two-Year Faculty; Administrative; Mid-Level and Professional Economic Research Institute Salary Assessor Mercer Executive; Finance Accounting & Legal; Human Resources Management; Information Technology Towers Watson Office & Business Support; Supervisory & Middle Management; Professional Administrative; Professional Specialized; Human Resources; Technical Support & Production; Top Management Benefits Data collection from the following sources: SHRM Employee Bureau of Labor Statistics

Total compensation The analysis indicates how Broward College compares to the market at the 50th percentile

Faculty summary Findings suggest that faculty salary ranges are competitive with the market at the 50th % and the maximums of the range, but the minimums are substantially lower than peer institutions (Fox Lawson) Per the Faculty Collective Bargaining Unit, new Faculty salaries often begin above the minimum of the range based on the individuals experience and educational rank The Faculty contract recent ratification increased the salary grid at all levels by 3% Full time faculty salaries were adjusted retroactive to July 2010, as applicable

Administrative and staff summary Aggregate representation of all non-faculty positions as compared to market median of 50th percentile

Administrative and staff summary (Fox, Lawson & associates) An aggregate of all non-faculty positions indicate the College’s salaries are 17.4% below comparable market median (50%) While comparable up to the 25th percentile range, employees are not moving through the range to keep pace with the market; creating salary compression The College’s benefit package helps to bring its total compensation package more in line with the market

Benefits summary Employer cost of benefits for the significant benefits offered by most employers were compared On an overall basis, the private sector spends about 29.6% of payroll on all benefits; colleges and universities spend about 30.7%; Broward College spends 32.62%

Fox, Lawson & Associates recommendations The College needs to determine where in relation to the market it wants to set its pay strategy The College will need to consider if there are internal equity issues for classifications to be addressed through job analysis The College should address pay compression The College should adopt salary administration practices that move employees through the range based on satisfactory performance and/or seniority

Recommendation #1 - The College needs to determine where in relation to the market it wants to set its pay strategy (Fox/Lawson) + / - 10% = competitive A review of the benchmarked positions by job family and pay grade was conducted and the average (where applicable) of the 50th percentile provided by Fox/Lawson was used to adjust the mid-point on the College salary schedule structure. Further review and costs may dictate that a point between the 25th and 50th percentile of salaries is an appropriate goal (per Fox/Lawson). Benefits unchanged

Recommendation #2 Classifications have begun to be addressed The College will need to consider if there are internal equity issues for classifications to be addressed through job analysis (Fox/Lawson) Large variances between the 50th percentile and the College’s actual salary(ies) indicate further review of position specific responsibilities and possible movement to a new job family and band within the College salary structure. Classifications have begun to be addressed

Recommendation #3 The College should address pay compression - the extent of this impact was not examined in the Fox/Lawson study (Fox/Lawson) The College should define a standard by which to indicate an employee should be at least to the mid-point of the salary range (at market) The last salary schedule adjustments for staff in 2010 did not address compression Funds were budgeted within the FY 13-14 budget to reasonably address compression

Recommendation #4 Adopt salary administration practices that move employees through the range based on satisfactory performance and/or seniority (Fox/Lawson) Pay-for-Performance Plan Allows for salaries to advance toward the pay grade midpoint (market rate) Applying a tiered percent-based program will assist the College in addressing and not further exacerbating salary compression

Recommendation #4 Merit Plan Constraints Merit plans that rely on bonuses must be available to all employees per Florida Statute 215.425 which was passed in 2011. This statute specifically states that : Any policy, ordinance, rule, or resolution designed to implement a bonus scheme must: (a) Base the award of a bonus on work performance; (b) Describe the performance standards and evaluation process by which a bonus will be awarded; (c) Notify all employees of the policy, ordinance, rule, or resolution before the beginning of the evaluation period on which a bonus will be based; and (d) Consider all employees for the bonus.

Pay for Performance Plan For Non-represented employees, at mid point of year: If the employee has an evaluation on file within the last year that is an overall rating of “Proficient” for Administrators or “Satisfactory” for PTS employees, and The unit is responsible in some way and met (above target, at target, or within 5% of reaching target) one of the Strategic Initiatives of the Strategic Plan or if not directly responsible for a Strategic Initiative, the unit successfully met the “Acceptable Target” on at least 50% of their stated Institutional Effectiveness (IE) Targets between July 1st and November 30th, 2013 (this will change to at least 75% for the next fiscal year and cover July 1st through June 30th.) This same proposal will be presented in bargaining for both UFF and FPE.

Outcomes Broward College has already begun reviewing position that showed large variances between current salary and market 50th percentile A Pay-for-Performance initiative is being rolled out beginning fiscal year 2013-2014 Future enhancements to Pay-for-Performance may be able to assist with overall pay compression

Broward college Proposals & cost estimates $4,030,751 $ 608,645 $1,650,000(estimat e) $ 550,000 (estimate) Adjust salary ranges – modify all salaries to retain placement within salary range Adjust salary ranges – bring to new minimums only Adjust salary ranges – bring 5 year static employees to mid-range Adjust salary ranges – bring 10 year static employees to mid-range “Static” employee = no classification change

Broward college Proposal & cost estimates Increase salary ranges and bring employees to minimums $ 608,645 Bring 10 years in current classification to 25th percentile $ 225,000 Total FY 13-14 cost $ 833,645 Note: Health Care increases to individual employees will need to increase by roughly 3% per average salary.