Budget Planning Council

September 29, 2006

M I N U T E S

HR/TC 141/45

 

 

Present: Co-chairs Bill Decatur and Kathy Krendl, Morgan Allen, Phyllis Bernt, Rich Carpenelli, Dominic Barbato, Gail Houlette, Aimee Howley, Joe McLaughlin, Brenda Noftz (for Wendy Merb-Brown), Greg Shepherd, David Thomas, Morgan Vis.

Absent: Dennis Irwin

Presenters:  Greg Fialko, Madeleine Scott and Mike Williford

Staff:  Larry Corrigan and John Day

 

I.             Compensation

a. Mike Williford – Information on faculty salary studies

2005-06 Ohio University Faculty Salary Study

  • The Institutional Research Office participates annually in the AAUP Faculty Salary Study; the report describes how faculty salaries at Ohio University compare to other universities
  • Table 1 shows the average faculty salary by faculty rank and institution for public universities in Ohio over the last seven years
  • Table 2 shows the number of full-time faculty at each rank for 2005-06
  • Table 3 shows the percent salary increases for continuing faculty over seven years
  • Table 4 and Figure 2 show Ohio University’s (all ranks combined) average faculty salary indexed over the last seven years compared to the CPI and national AAUP average faculty salary indexes
  • Table 5 shows average fringe benefits for faculty (all ranks) for 2005-06
  • Tables 6, 7, and 8 show the headcounts, gross salary amounts, and average salary amounts tracking full-time Group I faculty from 2005-05 to 2005-06
  • Table 9 shows faculty salaries by rank and discipline, comparing Ohio University’s salaries with CUPA-HR-report salaries for Ohio public universities
  • Table 10 shows the numbers of faculty reported in each discipline by rank by Ohio University and by the state-wide comparison universities
  • Table 11 shows faculty salaries by rank and discipline, comparing Ohio University’s salaries with Research II universities participating in Oklahoma State’s salary study
  • Table 12 shows the numbers of faculty reported in each discipline by rank by Ohio University and by the Research II universities
  • Table 13 shows Ohio University’s average faculty salaries compared with the average faculty salaries of the university’s ten peer institutions
  • Table 14 shows headcounts of Ohio University’s faculty and ten peer institutions’ as reported to AAUP

 

 

Faculty Salary Peer Comparisons and Estimates/5-year plan to advance Ohio University to next peer university quartile

  • Option A is a catch up over 5 year plan (only salary, not compensation which includes benefits)
  • Ohio University is in the 4th Quartile at $1.2M, University of Missouri-Columbus is next highest at $3.8M, and University of Connecticut-Storrs is at the top with $36.7M

o       Parking and healthcare premiums are variables—focus on healthcare should be disease prevention

  • With the information presented today, a task force of 5 needs to research the data and report back to BPC with a recommended action plan
  • Faculty salaries are in the bottom quartile; insurance is at the mid-point
  • A multi-year plan is solid to keep “focus”
  • Discussion regarding “who are our peers”--Ohio or North Carolina? (programs vary greatly and the Delaware study does not help much) Where do we lose students to?

 

b. Greg Fialko – information on administrative pay issues and future plans to study

Compensation Review & Update for BPC      1) Managers Guidelines for Compensation Management, 2) Ohio University Compensation Philosophy, 3) Compensation Review & Update

  • Philosophy is to pay employees at or above the established market
  • 2006-07 pay structure for Classified Staff and Administrative and Professionals distributed

o       Comments: It is less expensive for units to give merit or equity adjustments than have employees “hopping” to other areas for promotion purposes

o       What is the status of the draft policy to gain a 7-12% increase as opposed to a 5% upgrade in the current position drafted 2 years ago

  • Managers guidelines are pulled from 7+ compensation policies in the Ohio University Policy and Procedure Manual

o    Guidelines cover new hires, promotion, upgrade, demotion, lateral transfers, and periodic increases

o       Guidelines for Administrative include: special salary requests, advancement within a pay grade, lateral transfers, mid-year merit increases retention/counter offer, and equity adjustments (also IT)

  • Market is established via salary survey

o       CUPA-HR for administrative and executive positions

o       Watson Wyatt Worldwide Consulting, Mercer Consulting, and CompData

       consulting surveys are used to match IT & Classified salaries not available

       from CUPA

  • Administrative salaries are more difficult to track and benchmark compared to faculty  due to various job titles, descriptions of duties and data available

 

c. Madeleine Scott – summary of subcommittee recommendations from last year

·         See website for addendums to last years report

·         Concerns regarding professional development and funds not available

·         Establish minimum salary faculty salaries, review, and monitor annually

·         Audit needed for Administration positions; (degree vs. experience) positions are in the

      same category/classification

o       Accountability of supervisors and performance reviews are essential to this  process

·         Consider merit component to progress/advance

·         Equity adjustments need a separate, central pool

·         Salary study shows that departments with mostly female employees have lower salaries and compression issues

·         1% mid-year merit award last year was considered demoralizing

·         Hiring practices are ineffective and set staff up for progressing only to mid-point

·         Term faculty – advancing to tenure?

·         Start up funds/more attractive start up packages suggested

·         UHR compensation policy is confusing

·         No specific rates of increase recommended (15% for faculty)

·         Concern: 3-9 cuts  – need base support as part of the Faculty Initiative

·         A positive outcome would be that this study will produce solutions

 

II.        Reallocation/Realignment Funds

  • BPC part of process for accessing funds – to be discussed at next meeting

                       

III. NEXT MEETING- Friday, October 13, 10:00 – noon, HRTC 154

  • Time to form small teams and develop goals, strategies, and timelines for implementation
  • Past experience with UPAC was to forecast worst and best scenarios and determine plans for each situation