1. Sherri Coxon Executive HR Consultant Business Sherpa Group

2.  Salary survey data obtained from the following sources:  AON  Conference Board of Canada  Hay Group  Mercer  Morneau Shepell  Tech-Edge  Towers-Watson  WorldatWork

3.  Data provided for the following “cuts”:  Executive  Management  Professional  Office / Clerical / Technician  Trades / Production / Service  Data presented as follows:  Base Salary increases (%)  Salary Structure increases (%)  2013 actual adjustments and 2014 forecasted adjustments  National  Local perspective where available

4.  Definitions  Base Salary % = the total amount of all increases combined  Merit + general salary increases  Salary structure % = the amount by which the established job rate is adjusted to reflect economic changes in the defined marketplace  Job rate defined as mid-point, control point, 100% or range maximum, dependent on structure

5.  The base salary ranges are lower in almost every situation as compared to 2012, by as much as 0.5% in some situations  Salary structures similar to 2012  Consistent range movement across all job types  Ranges for “local” (Ontario or Ottawa) data are broader than those for the National data Low – High Ranges Base Salary %Structure (%) Executive2.5% – 3.0%1.5% – 2.4% Management2.6% – 3.1%1.6% – 2.3% Professional2.6% – 2.9%1.6% – 2.3% Office/Clerical/Technician2.6% – 3.1%1.6% – 2.3% Trades/Production/Service2.4% – 2.8%1.7% – 2.4% 2013 Actual Increases (National)

6.  2014 base salary projections indicate a high level of consistency between sources with very little change from the 2013 Projections  Structure adjustments are consistent to actuals for 2013  Ranges for “local” (Ontario or Ottawa) data are broader than those for the National data  Greater decline in base salaries than in salary structures Low – High Ranges Base Salary %Structure (%) Executive2.5% – 3.0%1.5% – 2.4% Management2.6% – 3.1%1.6% – 2.3% Professional2.6% – 3.1%1.7% – 2.2% Office/Clerical/Technician2.6% – 3.1%1.6% – 2.2% Trades/Production/Service2.4% – 2.9%1.6% – 2.2% 2014 Forecasted Increases (National)

7.  As organizations struggle with balancing limited budgets and the need to retain critical talent, they are segmenting their workforce and concentrating rewards on key and top employees - the gap between high-performing employees and those in the lower performing categories is widening significantly.  According to Mercer, in 2013:  Middle performers (60% of employees) received a 2.8% increase  Highest performers (6% of employees) received a 5.1% salary boost

8.  Overview  A growing team of HR professionals who provide full spectrum HR services to small and medium sized companies  Flexible and fully scalable HR function for companies where no HR team exists; and where there is an HR team in place, we provide additional expertise and bench-strength for peak work periods or special projects  Team includes HR Executives, HR business partners and generalists, talent acquisition experts, compensation specialists, and training and development professionals  Our clients include high tech, commercial businesses, retail, manufacturing, construction, finance, professional services, not-for-profit and NGOs, and owner-operated businesses in Canada, US and internationally  Our goal is to help organizations realize their full potential by creating and delivering the very best and most relevant HR practices that add the greatest value possible  Our clients have full control over the level and duration of the engagement by leveraging scalable resourcing that address near term priorities and long term strategies

9.  Despite weak points in the economy, companies need to continue to offer pay increases to attract and retain employees  Only 2% of organizations are projecting wage freezes as compared to 3.6% for 2013 (Towers Perrin)  Key Challenges for our Clients:  Attraction and Retention of top talent  Being creative with a limited budget  Managing internal equity Issues  Recognizing top performers

10.  Recognizing that money alone doesn’t drive employee engagement, we work with our clients to develop creative programs that employees value  Variable comp instead of, or in addition to, salary increases  Allows company to reward top performers  Self-funded Bonus Plan for ‘Not for Profits’ based on stretch objectives  Stock options  Additional time off  1 week vacation (2% of salary), ‘x’ number of Personal days  Flex time or ability to work from home (1+ day/week)  Attendance at conferences or training programs  Provide key employees with an opportunity to work on a special “high profile” project or take on a new role (even if a lateral move)  Opportunity to work closely with management on business strategy and to be involved in key decisions  Purchase a meaningful gift for key employees

11.  Employers recognize that many of their employees are being paid below market, creating challenges for the business:  Increased Turnover Costs  Increased work load for others, potential lost revenue, recruitment costs for replacement, training costs, ramp-up time, impacts on employee morale, etc.)  Compression Issues  To compete for talent, employers are hiring new employees at market rate while long-term valued and committed employees remain below market  How to address this situation?  Be conscious when hiring outside talent – is there an opportunity to promote from within (succession planning)  Develop targeted ‘Pay for Performance’ program  Develop a budget for equity adjustments – find a way to fund it  Be more intentional about your Employee Engagement Strategy  Get connected with the “at risk” employees to understand and address other factors that could help off-set the cash compensation challenge

13. www.ottawarewards.org