Case Study: Using ARL Salary Data to Establish and Maintain an Equitable Salary Structure for Faculty Librarians Presentation

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Case Study: Using ARL Salary Data to Establish and Maintain an Equitable Salary Structure for Faculty Librarians Presentation
Alternate Title:
Case Study: Using the Association of Research Libraries Salary Data to Establish and Maintain an Equitable Salary Structure for Faculty Librarians Presentation
Physical Description:
Presentation slides and materials
Language:
English
Creator:
Keith, Brian W.
Publisher:
George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Association of Research Libraries (ARL)
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, FL
Washington, DC
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Salary survey
Equity
Academic libraries

Notes

Abstract:
Webinar: Case Study: Using ARL Salary Data to Establish and Maintain an Equitable Salary Structure for Faculty Librarians; When: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 1:00PM - 2:00PM EDT; In this webcast Brian Keith will describe how the University of Florida Libraries used data from the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 ARL Salary Surveys to establish and implement a market-equity design with an internally and externally equitable salary structure for faculty librarians. Judy Ruttenberg will talk from the perspective of “Transforming Research Libraries” about how staff transformation relates to the future health of our organizations. Presenters: Brian Keith, Associate Dean for Human & Financial Resources, University of Florida Libraries; Judy Ruttenberg, Program Director for Transforming Research Libraries, ARL; Hosted By: Martha Kyrillidou, ARL; Terms:Salary Survey

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
System ID:
AA00016874:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Using ARL Salary Data to Establish and Maintain an Equitable Salary Structure for Faculty Librarians Webcast Association of Research Libraries September 10, 2013

PAGE 2

Thank You for Joining Us Everyone will be muted to cut down on background noise. Please type your questions in the chat box. YouTube channel. In addition, slides and supporting documents will be available in the University of Florida institutional repository. www.arl.org 2

PAGE 3

ARL Salary Survey The ARL Annual Salary Survey reports salaries for more than 12,000 professional positions in ARL member libraries on an annual basis. The survey also tracks minority representation in US ARL libraries and reports separate data for health sciences and law libraries.

PAGE 4

Introductions Martha Kyrillidou Senior Director, ARL Statistics and Service Quality Programs, Association of Research Libraries Judy Ruttenberg Program Director for Transforming Research Libraries, Association of Research Libraries Brian W. Keith Associate Dean for Administrative Services and Faculty Affairs, University of Florida Libraries www.arl.org 4

PAGE 5

Agenda Libraries program Discussion of how the University of Florida Libraries used data from the ARL Salary Survey to implement an internally and externally equitable salary structure for faculty librarians.

PAGE 6

Judy Ruttenberg Program Director Transforming Research Libraries (TRL) Association of Research Libraries

PAGE 7

TRL Priorities Strategic focus on the transforming workforce New services, new competencies, new skills Develop existing staff and recruit new talent Tools for the transforming organization Compensation management: fairness, equity, transparency www.arl.org 7

PAGE 8

Brian W. Keith Associate Dean, Administrative Services and Faculty Affairs University of Florida Libraries

PAGE 9

Note: Slides with links, documents and spreadsheets with calculations are available at http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/

PAGE 10

Note: All webcasts in this series can be found http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaHPIIKt RXCLb39HB41JzS25PUvlLiUys

PAGE 11

The objectives of compensation programs include: Recruitment Retention Equity Reward desired behavior Control costs Comply with legal regulations Further administrative efficiency Duda Prologue

PAGE 12

This session 1. Key Concepts Equity/Fairness Salary Plan Design (Elements and Terminology)

PAGE 13

This session 2. Experiences at the UF Libraries Decisions and policies establishing and maintaining librarian salary structures, referenced to the ARL Salary Survey data

PAGE 14

This session 2. Experiences at the UF Libraries Why? Illustrate the above concepts in practice Depict decisions, processes and outcomes Resulting system is transparent and maintainable, and modular and customizable -transferable

PAGE 15

This session 3. References

PAGE 16

Concepts behind an Equitable Salary Structure

PAGE 17

Equity and Fairness Equity External Internal Individual Personal Fairness Distributive Procedural Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 18

Forms of Equity External In comparison to similar jobs in other organizations Internal In comparison of different types of jobs in one organization Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 19

Forms of Equity Individual In comparison of performance of individuals working in the same type of job in the same organization Personal worth Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 20

Fairness Types Distributive Perceived equity of the pay received by employees Procedural Perceived equity of the decision making processes and procedures used to distribute pay Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 21

Fairness and Equity Research has generally found Procedural Fairness is most important for employee pay satisfaction. Individual Equity is the second most important. Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 22

Fairness Types Procedural Fairness (continued) Strongly influences whether employees view the organization and management as trustworthy and valuing them. Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 23

Fairness Types Procedural Fairness (continued) Increased through: Consistency Design participation Good communication practices R edress opportunities Terpstra, Honoree

PAGE 24

Salary Administration

PAGE 25

Salary Administration Three fundamental issues for pay policies: (1) setting pay levels in relation to other companies (2) evaluating individual jobs and determining pay relationships among them; and (3) determining pay relationships among individual workers within the same job. Personick

PAGE 26

Salary Administration These issues are addressed through effective Salary Structures

PAGE 27

WHAT is a Salary Structure? System where jobs of roughly equal value or worth are grouped into grades with competitive salary ranges. Note: One employer may have multiple models or approaches within this structure. Singer, Francisco

PAGE 28

WHY establish a structure? Compensation decisions made solely to pacify employees inevitably produce higher operating costs and create an environment that rewards complaints rather than performance. Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 29

Why establish a structure? Individualized compensation arrangements rarely go unnoticed by other employees, despite usually cause some rancor within the employee group. Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 30

Why establish a structure? By establishing compensation guidelines based on current market norms before recruiting for a position, employers can balance: and Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 31

Why establish a structure? Even though they may be responsible for managing costs, most managers strive to provide their employees with the highest suffer directly from the increased cost and they Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 32

Why establish a structure? When individual managers make decisions regarding subordinate compensation, every unit is likely to receive dissimilar pay for similar tasks. Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 33

Why establish a structure? Provides : Organizational consistency Reference for career development and predicting pay increases Both of which serve the objectives from the Prologue. Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 34

HOW do you develop a Salary Structure? Through Compensable Factors and Pay Ranges Personick

PAGE 35

Compensable Factors Definition: Any job attribute that provides a basis for determining the worth of the job. Singer, Francisco

PAGE 36

Compensable Factors Employee based examples : Education/training Experience Certification/licenses Singer, Francisco

PAGE 37

Compensable Factors Job based examples : Customer relations/service Communications/ key interactions/ level of contact Supervisory responsibility Supervision received Job Complexity Problem solving Decision making (authority and impact) Working conditions Responsibility for assets Singer, Francisco

PAGE 38

Compensable Factors Their use requires decisions regarding: weights degrees or levels Singer, Francisco

PAGE 39

Pay Range Definition: The minimum to the maximum base rate of pay for employees in the same or similar job Often expressed pay grades Singer, Francisco

PAGE 40

Range Width Definition: Percentage difference from the minimum to the maximum of a pay range Vary, but typically narrower for lower pay grades Rate minimums should attract qualified job candidates while rate maximums should be set to reward and retain high achievers Singer, Francisco

PAGE 41

Range Progression Definition: The difference, or jump, from one grade to the next Vary by position type, but typically smaller for lower pay grades. Should be large enough to reflect progressive increases in compensable elements of the positions grouped together. Singer, Francisco

PAGE 42

Range Midpoint Used to orient salary levels for example, the more highly rated or the most experienced employees are above the midpoint Generally, for white collar workers, the midpoint represents a job's market value. Personick

PAGE 43

Salary Structural Integrity An organization that has invested time and effort in designing an equitable, competitive program must be willing to adhere to it, or there really is no program at all. Whittlesey, Maurer

PAGE 44

Salary Structural Integrity Maintained through policies or practices for Recruiting Counter Offers Promotions Lateral Moves Merit and ATB Increases

PAGE 45

Concepts And

PAGE 46

Main Campus and Medical Libraries Employee Population Faculty 84 Staff 169 Students and OPS 164 Total 417 UF Orientation

PAGE 47

Library Faculty 9 month 3 Adjunct/Visiting 2 12 Month 79 Total 84 UF Orientation

PAGE 48

3 Levels of Library Faculty Ranks Assistant IN 2 Assistant UL 23 Associate IN 3 Associate UL 38 Senior Associate IN 0 UL 15 UF Orientation

PAGE 49

Library Staff (1) Others IT (2) Non IT (3) Library Faculty Deans (4) Chairs and Associate Chairs (5) All others (6) Students and OPS (7) UF Libraries Salary Systems

PAGE 50

Historic Issues with UF Librarian Salaries Compression Ad hoc salary decisions based (inconsistently) upon rank assumptions of job worth and market demand Lack of transparency Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 51

Joint Committee formed in 2008 Charge: Establish a market equity design with an internally and externally equitable salary structure Final report submitted March 2009 Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 52

Joint Committee Findings: Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Salary Survey is a serviceable external measure Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 53

Joint Committee Findings: ARL US, public university libraries constitute a suitable representation of institutions Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 54

Joint Committee Findings: job types are the most reasonable basis for external linkage Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 55

Joint Committee Findings: Applying locally defined compensable factors allows for internal equity Advanced degrees held in addition to the MLS, which are applicable to the job assignment A limited number of librarian positions require uncommon skills, such as foreign language fluency Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 56

Joint Committee Findings: Salaries should reflect differences in librarian rank and length of service 1. 12 15 years of service represented the midpoint of the distribution for ARL data and was the average for UF librarians Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 57

Joint Committee Findings: Salaries should reflect differences in librarian rank and length of service 2. the UF rank of Associate UL represented midpoint, too Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 58

Joint Committee Findings: Performance is an important component of an equitable salary structure Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 59

Establishing a NEW Librarian Salary Structure Next turn at bat: Library Administration Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 60

ARL Salary Survey My Take Comprehensive Broad participation among ARL HR officers, including UF institutions Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 61

ARL Salary Survey My Take Large data pool offers higher validity Includes position specific data can assume HR Officers would likely interpret definitions similarly Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 62

ARL Salary Survey My Take Updated annually data Joint committee used 08 09 Implementation based on 09 10 Includes data from law and medical libraries Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 63

ARL Salary Survey My Take Plus, the data is accessible Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 64

ARL Salary Survey My Take reference for ARL institutions Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 65

ARL Salary Survey My Take Challenges Tables are numerous but statistics and tables are limited for our purposes This requires the deriving of data Salary Systems Library Faculty http://publications.arl.org/ARL Annual Salary Survey 2009%E2%80%932010/

PAGE 66

ARL Salary Survey My Take Challenges Definitions codes Subject Specialist primarily build collections, but may also offer specialized reference and bibliographic services Reference librarians both general and specialized Public Services non supervisory, except reference librarians Salary Systems Library Faculty http://publications.arl.org/ARL Annual Salary Survey 2009%E2%80%932010/

PAGE 67

ARL Salary Survey Analysis Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 68

ARL Salary Survey Analysis Reminder: ALL calculations used in UF Library Faculty Market Equity are reflected in the spreadsheet posted at http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/ Note: There you can also find a primer on weighted averages Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 69

ARL Salary Survey Tables of Interest Table 25: average salaries by position and geographic region Table 26: average salaries of US librarians by position and years of experience Figure 5: average salaries for Functional Specialists Table 20: average salaries by position and years of experience Salary Systems Library Faculty http://publications.arl.org/ARL Annual Salary Survey 2009%E2%80%932010/

PAGE 70

ARL Salary Survey Analysis Comparison of Regions Note: Derived from Table 25 positions See Salary Systems Library Faculty http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00002

PAGE 71

ARL Salary Survey Analysis Calculation of average salaries for subject specialist, reference, and public services; and catalogers and technical services Note : Derived from Table 26 Ref Salary Systems Library Faculty http:// ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00002

PAGE 72

ARL Salary Survey Analysis Average salaries for functional specialist provided in Figure 5 Salary Systems Library Faculty http:// ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00002

PAGE 73

ARL Salary Survey Analysis Establish years of experience and job type midpoints Note: Derived from Table 26 Salary Systems Library Faculty http:// ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00002

PAGE 74

Findings 1. Variations exist between, regions and type of entity (public v. private) 2. Years of experience is a stable predictor of salary Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 75

Findings 3. Medical positions would be addressed with ARL numbers (versus MLA) Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 76

Findings 4. Average salaries vary significantly by job type Salary Systems Library Faculty http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00002

PAGE 77

Decisions necessary to create a Library Faculty Salary Structure Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 78

Decisions: Relevant Market We would use South Atlantic, Public and Private Applying a factor of .9383 to national averages Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 79

Decisions: specific to each faculty member based upon Position specific factors Individual specific factors (e.g. experience) Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 80

Decisions: Position Groupings We would merge Subject Specialist, Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 81

Decisions: Stipends for department chairs and associate chairs excluded from the base salary calculations Salary Systems Library Faculty See: Stipend for Smathers Libraries

PAGE 82

Decisions: Salary specific to each faculty member based upon 1. Position specific factors Job Type Language : Adjust up 9 %, if foreign language required for position Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 83

Decisions: Salary specific to each faculty member based upon 2. Individual specific compensable factors: Rank : Adjust up or down, from Associate, by 9% for Assistant UL and UL Length of Service: Adjust up or down for applicable experience above or below ARL average Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 84

See: Resulting Faculty Salary Structure Salary Systems Library Faculty http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00003

PAGE 85

Implications: Faculty in similar job types form peer groups (position groupings) Other factors will differentiate their actual salaries (compensable factors) Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 86

Decisions: Salary specific to each faculty member based upon 2. Individual specific compensable factors (continued) : Advanced Degrees: Adjust up for additional relevant advanced degrees (maximum of $5,000) Performance : Adjust up to retain effect of 2010 merit increases Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 87

Decisions regarding Performance and Eligibility: Cap all raises at 18% Cap evaluation) in primary responsibility in either of the past 2 years Exclude category in either of the past 2 years Does not preclude the ability to apply for individual market equity evaluations Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 88

Application Salary Systems Library Faculty http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00002

PAGE 89

Communication Salary Systems Library Faculty http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00004

PAGE 90

To summarize: Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 91

1. External equity based on: Job type (Midpoint for ranges) Geographic region (Application of ATB Factor) Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 92

2. Internal equity based on: Years of experience (with UF Ranks imposed) Special requirements of the position SKA (Language ) Administrative (Stipends ) Educational credentials Performance (inclusion of past merit & qualifiers) Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 93

Results Total eligible: 76 Library Faculty 49 (64%) targeted to receive raise 19 ( 25%) already at or above market equity 8 ( 11%) do not meet minimum requirement Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 94

Results Of the 49 targeted to receive raise 7 faculty capped at 18% 7 faculty capped at 9% Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 95

Maintenance: Salary Systems Library Faculty http://ufdc.ufl.edu/l/AA00016874/00005

PAGE 96

Maintenance: October 2013 Across the Board and Merit Salary Systems Library Faculty

PAGE 97

References Terpstra D., & Honoree, A. (2003, November). The Relative Importance of External, Internal, Individual and Procedural Equity to Pay Satisfaction: Procedural Equity May be More Important to Employees Than Organizations Believe, Compensation & Benefits Review 35 (6), 67 74. Singer P. M., & Francisco, L. L. (2009). Developing a compensation plan for your library Chicago: American Library Association. Romanoff K., Boehm, K., & Benson, E. (1986, December). Pay Equity: Internal and External Considerations. Compensation & Benefits Review 18 (6), 17 25. Bloom M. (2004). The Ethics of Compensation Systems. Journal of Business Ethics, 52 (2), 149 152 Duda F. (1989, Summer) Developing Compensation Systems in Academic Libraries. Library Trends 38 (1), 103 126 Personick M. (1984, December). White Collar Pay Determination under Range of Rate Systems, Monthly Labor Review 107, (12), 25 30 Whittlesey Z., & Maurer, C. (1993, July). Ten common compensation mistakes, Compensation and Benefits Review 25 (4), 44 48. Sunday K., & Pfuntner J. (2008). How widely do wages vary within jobs in the same establishment? Monthly Labor Review, 131(2), 17 50.

PAGE 98

Effectively Using ARL Salary and Demographic Data March 5: Better Salaries with Better Data: Introduction to the ARL Salary Survey May 21: Using ARL Salary Data to Make the Case for Higher Salaries September 10: Case Study: Using ARL Salary Data to Establish and Maintain an Equitable Salary Structure for Faculty Librarians November 5: Analyzing Age and Race/Ethnicity Demographics

PAGE 99

THANK YOU