Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1

2 M group vital to McGill’s operations, key player in growth and development of McGill as a World Class Institution Desire to align Human Resource practices with “Best Practices”. Commitment made to management and professional staff in December 2007 to review the current M Compensation framework 2

3 Current M salary structure not systematically benchmarked since the implementation of the Pay Equity Program in 2002 Current structure lacks flexibility to adapt to market conditions for attraction and retention of key talent Pay scales are narrow; salary progression is slow and a promotion is needed in order to obtain a significant salary increase Does not allow for sufficient recognition of individual contribution No clear market reference point to validate competitiveness 3

4 Current Benchmark Excercise Two (2) consulting companies were selected to conduct this benchmarking exercise: Normandin-Beaudry : Mercer, Watson Wyatt, Hewitt The Hay Group 4

5 Levels 1 & 2 (grades 5 & below)  McGill’s salaries are overall competitive Levels 3 & 4 (grades 6 & above)  McGill’s salaries are generally less competitive SAF positions: The maxima of McGill’s current salary scale is in line with the median salary of our reference market ; Actual salaries are on average 5% lower than market median Note: This study was conducted only on base salaries, and does not take into account the other components of the total rewards (benefits, holidays, etc.) offering of the University 5

6 Way Forward- Best Practices 6

7 Best Practices : Salary Benchmarks Current Practice Going Forward Para Public & Public Sectors primarily Yet we recruit from a range of sectors including Private Industry Local Markets- Montreal Yet we occasionally recruit within the Province and other provinces in Canada Internal Equity focus Yet best practices indicate focus should be both external & internal 7 Private Industry data in addition to Public and Para Public Based on Local & National reference Market Focus on external market as well as internal references

8 Wider ranges for each grade; allows for: Growth in the role ; Increased complexity, scope; Correct positioning of roles based on market. Target Pay as a main reference point Based on the market; Slope Increase Between all grades; Recognizes the complexity of roles 8 Best practices: Salary Scale

9 Movement in Salary Ranges Capacity to pay Growth in the role Acquiring additional competencies, skills, qualifications Achieving/exceeding objectives; Greater impact on the institution Unusual market pressure – example, retention of hot skills i.e. C.A.’s now, IT during Y2K 9

10 10

11 Now Effective December 1 2 reference points : Minimum and Maximum; Market reference point not clear Single Zone: Min Max Narrow scales- little or no room to move ; pay compression; red circle situations resulting in lump sum payments. Linear slope between pay grades 11 Introduction of Target Pay as main reference point for competitive pay. Based on McGill Competitive market. Three Zones Min Target Max Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3 Increase in the difference between min & max to provide more movement within each salary range at all levels. Increasing slope between target pay points to reflect increasing complexity

12 Current Structure 12

13 New Structure 13

14 14

15 New incumbents.. Recent promotion… Acquiring new skills… Meeting most requirements Meets all requirements… Sustained achievements… Possesses key competencies, both technical and behavioral 15 Significantly exceeds requirements consistently… Possesses high demand skills… Recognized as an expert in their field Zone 2 – Target (95-110%) Zone 1 Development/Transition Zone 3- Exception $ Min $$$ Job Max Salary Management The range associated with each grade is divided into three zones Target 100% The division of each grade into 3 zones provides increased flexibility and enables the University to place a fair value on the competencies, responsibilities and contribution of each employee

16 16 Ensure McGill’s competitive salary positioning on the broader reference market Reinforce the link between contribution and rewards Support employee growth & development Foster accountability/ownership at local managerial level

17 Next Steps Develop competency framework for each job family Technical competencies & behavioral competencies for each role in each job family Review current salary policies and define specific criteria for moving within and between the ranges in new structure Develop specific merit guidelines to support the implementation of the salary policy 17

18 18

19 Salary Freeze in 1995 Catch-up exercise begun in 2001 New “M” Compensation Structure implemented in 2002 19 Actual Year2002200320042005200620072008 CPI2.2%2.8%1.8%2.2%2.0% 2.2% ???? Market Avg. Increase*3.5% to 4% 3.5% McGill Budget5% **4.5% 2.5%3.0% * Source: Conference Board of Canada. Aggregate national & local (Québec) data for all industries, as well as public, para-public and not-for-profit organizations. Average increase = overall increase budget, including scale increase, across the board, progressions, merit. ** 2002 included the 2nd and final phases of a catch-up exercise begun in 2001 to compensate for freezes and lower budgets in previous years. Note: The University uses the annual CPI of previous December as a reference when determining salary policy

20 2008: 3% 2% minimum increase for all employees meeting requirements of job 1% additional budget given to each unit to recognize leading performance 2009: 3% 1% minimum increase for all employees meeting requirements of job 2% additional budget given to each unit to recognize leading performance 2010: 3.5% % of minimum increase and performance increase to be defined 20

21 Performance levels Performance Categories—4 levels LEVEL OF PERFORMANCEMINIMUM INCREASE 1. Leading2% + 2. Strong2%-3% 3. Building Consistency0-2% 4. Immediate Improvement Required0% 21

22 Performance Definitions Leading Consistently outstanding performance exceeds expectations Strong Solid performance and consistently meets job requirements Building Consistency Performance does not consistently meet job requirements Requires Immediate Improvement Performance consistently fails to meet job requirements 22

23 Questions / Comments 23

Download ppt "Management Forum Presentation November 3, 2008 Lynne Gervais, Associate Vice-Principal Human Resources 1."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google