A Biennial Report on
Recommended Changes to the State's Compensation
System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005
SOURCE: http://www.sao.state.tx.us/Reports/report.cfm?report=2002/03-701
Placed into HTML with specific links by M.G. Maness
Chapter 1 The State's Compensation System
Employees' Salaries Are Below Market Pay
Table 1 Examples of
State Employees' and Non-State Employees' Salaries
Law Enforcement Officers' Pay Is Not in Line With
Texas' City Police Department Pay
Chapter 2 Employee Pay Increase Recommendations
Table 2
Characteristics of Four Types of Pay Increases
Provide a Cost-of-Living Increase
Create a Performance Award Fund
Encourage Merit and One-Time Merit Increase
Programs
Chapter 3 Compensation System Technical Change Recommendations
Eliminate Dual Versions of the Salary Schedules
Reallocate Job Classes With Salary Ranges That
Are Significantly Behind the Market
Give Agencies Additional
Flexibility
Chapter 4 The Legislature Should Formalize the State's Compensation
Philosophy
Appendix 1 Objectives, Scope and Methodology
Appendix 2 Proposed Salaries and Classifications for Salary Schedule C
Appendix 3 Revised Salary Schedule A
Appendix 4 Revised Salary Schedule B
Appendix 5 Classification Plan Recommendations
Appendix 6 Recommended Statutory Changes
September 2002
Report No. 03-701 Lawrence F. Alwin,
CPA State Auditor 1 www. sao. state. tx. us To
report waste, fraud, or abuse in state government call the SAO Hotline:
1-800-TX-AUDIT. 2 This review
was conducted in accordance with Government Code, Chapter 654. For more
information regarding this report, please contact Kelli Vito, CCP, PHR, State
Classification Officer, at (512) 936-9600.
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes to the State's Compensation
System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 SAO
Report No. 03-701 September 2002
Overall Conclusion
The State's compensation
system provides many tools to address employee pay issues. We recommend the Legislature consider pay
increase options for employees and technical changes to maintain the
compensation system. The total cost to implement all of our salary
recommendations is $124 million for the biennium. However, this does not
include the cost to provide agencies funding for merit increases.
We found that:
Salary Schedules A and B generally provide competitive salary ranges. State employees' pay is not competitive with
salaries for comparable work in
government and private industry for many job classes. State trooper pay is not in line with Texas'
city police departments.
Employee pay lags the market, even though
the State's salary schedules provide
competitive salary ranges. While that may sound contradictory, the gap exists
because
state agencies are unable financially or culturally to fully use the tools
available to them.
We recommend the Legislature adopt a
formal compensation philosophy specifically
outlining legislative intent regarding the three components of a compensation system
salary, benefits, and retirement. This could reduce the amount of time
legislators spend
debating the methods used to grant employee pay increases during future
legislative
sessions. By forming this foundation for how to pay employees, legislators
could then focus
more strategically on funding options. We have included in this report the
details of our
philosophy recommendations.
Summary of Recommendations
Employee Pay Increases
Award a 2.1 percent
cost-of-living increase in the second year of the biennium to
employees within Salary Schedules A and B. (The increase of 2.1 percent is 75
percent
of the Consumer Price Index for calendar year 2001.) Estimated cost: $103
million
Update Salary Schedule C, in the second
year of the biennium, to make law enforcement
salaries more competitive with city police department salaries. Estimated cost:
$6 million 3
Page 4
Establish a performance award fund for agencies that meet certain performance
standards. Agencies would use the fund to grant one-time performance awards to
high-performing
employees. Initial funding: $14 million
Encourage and enable agencies to use the
merit and one-time merit increase programs
available within the current system. We believe the Legislature should consider
funding
agency merit increase budgets.
Compensation System Technical Changes
Eliminate salary steps, and
expand the ranges for Salary Schedule A. No fiscal impact.
Modify some salary ranges of Schedule B to ensure proper range width. No fiscal
impact.
Eliminate dual versions of the salary schedules. Agencies will be asked to
incur the
fiscal impact over the next biennium.
Reallocate job classes with salary ranges
that are significantly behind the market.
Estimated cost: $472,000 for the biennium
Make routine maintenance changes to the
Position Classification Plan, such as deleting
job classes with few or no incumbents. Estimated cost: $185,000 for the
biennium
Statutory Changes
Modify the current reallocation
language to provide more flexibility to agencies in
moving employees in the salary range.
Increase maximum amount for employee
awards to $100.
Grant additional authority to move employees' salaries within their salary
ranges for reasons other than performance, such as market conditions. 4
Proposed
State Compensation Philosophy
The State of Texas is
committed to providing a total compensation package that enables the State to
attract, motivate, and retain highly skilled and talented employees. A
competitive total compensation package includes an effective salary
administration program, a comprehensive benefits package, and an employee
retirement system.
Salary
The State uses the Position
Classification Plan (Plan) to pay employees performing similar jobs across
agencies at similar rates. The Plan outlines specific job titles and
occupational groups and establishes salary groups for each job title. The Legislature sets not-to-exceed rates for
a limited number of high-level, executive positions, which are exempt from the
Plan.
The State uses three salary schedules,
which define salary ranges for job titles:
Schedule A for administrative support, maintenance, technical, and
paraprofessional jobs
Schedule B for professional and managerial jobs
Schedule C for law enforcement jobs at four agencies
To the extent funds are available, the Legislature may increase the salary
ranges of Salary Schedules A and B so that they fall within 10 percent of the
market, based on the midpoints of the salary groups.
To the extent funds are available, the
Legislature may increase Salary Schedule C actual salaries so that they fall in
line with the average salaries of Texas' city police departments. To the extent funds are available, the
Legislature may fund across-the-board increases for employees in Salary
Schedules A and B at not less than 75 percent of the Consumer Price Index for
the preceding calendar year as reported by the United States Bureau of Labor.
The increase will take effect on September 1 in the second year of each
biennium.
To the extent funds are available, the
Legislature may set aside a pool of money to be used by agencies that meet
certain performance levels as outlined in the General Appropriations Act.
Qualifying agencies may use this money to grant lump-sum rewards to employees
with outstanding performance that contributed to the agencies' success. To the extent funds are available, the
Legislature may provide funding to agencies to encourage granting merit and
one-time merit increases to employees with high performance in order to move
employees' base pay throughout their salary ranges.
To the extent funds are available, the
Legislature may provide certain correctional positions at the Department of
Criminal Justice and the Youth Commission with automatic salary increases based
on the length of time worked in their positions.
Benefits
The State of Texas will offer a
comprehensive benefits package, including an insurance program, deferred
compensation system, and tax-deferred spending accounts.
To the extent funds are available, the
Legislature will fund 100 percent of employees' health insurance coverage and
50 percent of dependent coverage.
Retirement
The State will offer a defined
benefit retirement program that provides an annuity to employees who have
reached certain age and years-of-service requirements.
The State will pay health insurance
premiums for retirees and their dependents after the retiree has 10 years of
state service.
Employees are eligible for disability retirement if they become disabled while
performing their work, regardless of age or length of service.
Employees' beneficiaries may receive certain benefits if the employee dies
before retirement. 5
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September
2002 SAO Report No. 03-701
Benchmark job refers to a job or group of jobs used for making
pay comparisons, either within or outside the organization. Other jobs in a
compensation system are slotted around the benchmark jobs. Source: World at Work
Detailed Results
Chapter 1 The
State's Compensation System
The State's compensation system includes
salary, benefits, and retirement. These compensation components allow the State
to attract, retain, and motivate employees.
Internal and external factors influence the mix of salary, benefits, and
retirement programs. Internal factors may include the State's organizational
culture and cost of implementation, while external factors include the labor
market and competition for employees.
In fiscal year 2001, the State spent
approximately:
$4.9 billion on employees' salaries.
$1.6 billion for employee benefit payments.
$865.4 million in retirement annuity payouts and $277 million in contributions
to
the retirement fund for current employees.
The total amount represents approximately
21 percent of the State's $37 billion in total expenditures (excluding
expenditures for education and capital outlays).
This report focuses on the salary
component of the State's compensation package, which includes the salary
schedules, the Position Classification Plan (Plan), and
salary administration policies.
Salary Schedules A and B provide salary
ranges for the State's various job classes. They set the minimum and maximum
amounts an agency can pay an employee in a certain position. The midpoint in a
salary range is meant to correspond to the average pay in the job market.
Salary ranges are typically developed around the midpoint to allow flexibility
for pay variances based on employee experience, expertise, and performance. The
State Classification Office (SCO) considers a salary schedule generally
competitive if the midpoints are within 10 percent of the job market on
average. We analyzed several benchmark jobs in both schedules and compared these
with the appropriate job markets. Our analysis of Salary Schedules A and B
shows that both schedules are within this 10 percent acceptable range. 7
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002 SAO Report No. 03-701
We believe that the competitiveness of
the salary schedules has improved due to changes the legislature made during
the 77th Legislative Session to reallocate certain positions and to increase
the maximums of certain Salary Schedule A and B ranges, which increased the
midpoints.
Employees'
Salaries Are Below Market
Pay
While the State's salary ranges are
competitive, on average state employees' salaries fall below market salaries
for comparable work. We compared 88 benchmark jobs in state government with
comparable benchmark jobs outside state government and found that, on average,
state employees make 14 percent less than the market pay. Table 1 contains
specific examples.
How can the salary ranges of Salary
Schedule A and B be competitive while state employees make considerably less
than the market pay? The answer is that agencies are not using the full salary
ranges to pay employees. About three-quarters of classified regular full-time
employees in both of these schedules make less than the midpoints of their
salary ranges.
So, why do agencies not use the full
salary ranges to pay employees? There are probably many reasons, but the most
logical are budgetary constraints and/ or agency culture. Many agencies may not
have sound salary administration guidelines, may not support merit increases
within the agency, may use career ladders inappropriately, or may have a policy
to always hire new employees at the minimum salaries.
Most agencies report that they do not
have the budget to systematically provide merit increases. Merit increases help
agencies make full use of the salary ranges by moving employees through the
ranges. The SCO surveyed agency human resources directors about the State's
merit increase system. Most of the respondents believe the system provides the
needed flexibility; however, they do not believe that their agencies have the
financial resources available to take full advantage of implementing merit
increases (see Figures 1 and 2).
Table 1
Examples of State Employees' and Non-State Employees' Salaries
Average Salaries
|
Position |
State Employees |
Non-State Employees |
|
Staff Accountant |
$34,719 |
$40,917 |
|
Entry-Level Engineer |
$41,032 |
$51,374 |
|
Entry-Level Data Entry Operator |
$18,794 |
$20,845 |
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002
SAO Report No. 03-701
Current Merit Procedures Provide
Agencies With the Flexibility to Reward Outstanding Performers
Strongly Disagree/ Disagree 14%
Strongly Agree/ Agree 75%
Neutral 11%
Agencies Have the Financial Resources
to Grant Merit Increases
Neutral 11%
Strongly Agree/ Agree 34%
Strongly Disagree/ Disagree 55%
The most recent Survey of Organizational
Excellence, conducted by The University of Texas School of Social Work,
revealed that employees perceive their pay as non-competitive. Employees rated
"Fair Pay" the lowest of all of the survey categories. Fair pay in
the survey addresses how well the State's compensation package "holds
up" when employees compare it with compensation packages of similar jobs
in their own communities.
Law
Enforcement Officers' Pay
Is Not in Line With Texas' City
Police Department Pay
Salary Schedule C covers commissioned law
enforcement officers in four agencies, and it provides parity among the
officers at these agencies. Troopers employed by the Department of Public
Safety are the largest group of state law enforcement officers. Historically,
the salaries of the other three agencies' officers have been matched with
trooper salaries. Based on this, we reviewed salary data for comparable
positions at Texas's city police departments. Given the role of the state
trooper, we believe that trooper and officer salaries should be on par with
Texas city police department salaries.
Our analysis found that the State pay was
slightly less for trooper positions and that there was a greater lag with
officer positions (Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain) than the police
departments. In addition, most city police departments provide a variety of
additional types of pay such as field-training officer pay, educational pay,
and certification pay. It should be noted that Salary Schedule C employees had
far lower turnover rates (6 percent) than employees within Salary Schedules A
(23 percent) and B (16 percent) in fiscal year 2001. 9
Page 10 This page intentionally left blank. 10
Page 11
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes to the State's Compensation System for
Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002
SAO Report No. 03-701
Chapter 2 Employee Pay Increase Recommendations
We offer the following recommendations
that together will help address the state employee pay issues identified in
Chapter 1.
Provide a cost-of-living increase for
employees in Salary Schedules A and B.
Increase Salary Schedule C.
Create a performance award fund.
Encourage merit and one-time merit increase programs.
There are several ways an organization can increase employees' pay. Generally,
a salary program will have some mixture of the four methods described in Table
2.
Table 2
Characteristics of Four Types of Pay Increases
1. Salary Structure Increases Are
used to keep salary ranges competitive with the market. Move entire schedule
forward by flat dollar amount or percentage. Usually allow all employees to
receive the increase and keep their relative positions within the salary
structure.
2.
Cost-of-Living Increases Are
generally given to all employees or a group of employees. Provide employees
with base salary increases as a percentage of salary or a flat dollar amount.
Move employees up in their salary ranges. Employees at the maximum of their
ranges would receive lump-sum awards.
Move employees' salaries closer to the midpoints or maximums of their salary
ranges. Help employees' pay maintain purchasing power in the face of inflation
and are typically tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
Do not change salary structure.
3.
Time-Based Increases Are
given to certain employees based on time worked in their positions. Generally
provide employees with base salary increases or supplements, such as longevity
pay. Are suitable for routine jobs in which performance level is difficult to
distinguish between employees.
4.
Pay-for-Performance Increases Are given only to those employees who demonstrate outstanding
performance on the job. Tie employee performance to organizational performance.
Require that the organizational performance assessment system must be sound.
Historically, the Legislature has granted
salary structure increases. This type of increase helps maintain the
competitiveness of the salary schedules and provides an across-the-board
increase to employees. In contrast, cost-of-living adjustments do not change
the salary schedules, but rather move employees' salaries within the current
ranges. 11
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002 SAO Report No. 03-701
The State does provide time-based
increases for some positions. The majority of these are correctional positions
at the Department of Criminal Justice and the Youth Commission. Employees of
these agencies receive automatic increases based on the length of time they
have worked in their positions. The 77th Legislature provided approximately
$120 million to fund these programs for the fiscal year 2002 2003 biennium.
The State also offers a longevity pay supplement to employees.
The State offers several options for
agencies to compensate employees for outstanding performance. In addition to
merit and one-time merit increases, agencies may also grant administrative
leave, offer $50 recognition awards, and provide performance rewards to
employees if the agency meets certain performance standards.
Provide
a Cost-of-Living Increase
We believe that employee pay needs to
increase but that Salary Schedules A and B currently provide competitive
ranges. A cost-of-living increase would address this issue, in part. The
purpose of this increase is to move employees through their salary ranges and
help them maintain their purchasing power in the face of inflation. This type
of increase is intended solely as a salary maintenance tool, which facilitates
movement through a salary range. Employees who are already at the maximum of
their salary schedules would receive lump-sum awards. Cost-of-living increases
are typically tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). We recommend that state
employees be given a 2.1 percent cost-of-living adjustment in the second year
of the biennium. This increase equals 75 percent of the calendar year 2001 CPI
increase, which was 2.8 percent. We estimate this increase would cost $103
million, which does not include the cost to fund a similar increase for higher
education employees.
We believe cost-of-living increases are
important in maintaining base-line salary levels for all employees. However, we
also understand the strict budget requirements placed on the State. The fiscal
impact of this increase can be lowered if it is given only to employees with
more than 12 months of service ($ 95 million) or 24 months of service ($ 82
million).
We recommend that Salary Schedule C be
increased based on our analysis of state trooper salaries compared with those
at Texas' city police departments. We recommend that this increase take place
in the second year of the biennium. See Appendix 2 for the proposed
classifications and salaries for Salary Schedule C. The total cost to implement these increases is $6 million for
the second year of the biennium.
Schedule C is designed based on actual
pay rates rather than salary ranges for positions. Since Texas' police
departments are a public sector market, we believe that Schedule C actual pay
rates should be comparable to these. This is in contrast to 12
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002 SAO Report No. 03-701
The Harvard Business School conducted a
study of 207 companies. The study showed that companies with performance-enhancing
cultures fared much better on financial and operational measures than those
that did not have performance incentives.
Source: Workspan, February 2002,
Volume 45, Number 2
Schedules A and B, in which salary ranges
are set around a midpoint. Since the market for Salary Schedules A and B
includes both public and private sector pay, we believe it is appropriate for
the midpoints to have a certain lag. At some time in the future, the
Legislature may also want to consider developing educational and certification
incentives to provide additional pay for the acquisition of better skills.
Create
a Performance Award Fund
The State currently has several
mechanisms that agencies can use to reward employees for performance. We
believe that the State could benefit from expanding the performance reward
program it currently offers.
Since fiscal year 1998, agencies have
participated in a performance reward program based on agency performance. The
General Appropriations Act contains guidelines relating to these performance
rewards. The purpose of these rewards is to recognize employees at agencies
that achieve and maintain designated key performance target levels. In fiscal
year 2001, only 10 agencies qualified to provide the reward by meeting their
performance measure targets. Of these, only two agencies provided performance
rewards to employees. We believe this program could provide a valuable
incentive to agencies if modified. We recommend that the Legislature provide
some funding to this program to encourage more agencies to focus on achieving
performance results. Qualifying agencies would receive a portion of the fund
based on their overall payroll.
These agencies would then be allowed to
provide one-time performance awards to employees based on documentation that
the employees' performance was linked to the agency's overall performance.
Providing these awards as lump-sum payments does not increase an agency's
overall base payroll. An agency would have to achieve its performance measure
targets each year in order to reward its employees.
We recommend initial funding at $14
million for the second year of the biennium, which is 5 percent of the payroll
budgets of the 10 qualifying agencies in fiscal year 2001. As the funded
incentive gains acceptance, agency performance may improve and more agencies
may become eligible. The Legislature could then consider additional funding for
this program.
The intent of this program is to drive
agency performance. Therefore, the compensation incentive is only as good as
the agency performance assessment system it is based on. Sound performance
indicators that reflect agency results must be in place. If the Legislature
continues to expand this program in the future, the agency performance
assessment system will need even more attention.
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002
SAO Report No. 03-701
Encourage
Merit and One-Time Merit
Increase Programs
While funding the performance reward program
will provide an incentive for more agencies to achieve their overall
performance targets, it will not provide funding for agencies to give general
merit increases to their employees. We believe the merit and one-time merit
programs are vital to the health of state employees' pay, and both programs
have their benefits. Merit increases raise employees' base salaries and move
employees forward in their salary ranges, which makes the employees' pay more
competitive with market pay. One-time merits provide a lump-sum increase
without increasing employees' base pay, which helps hold down long-term payroll
costs. The State's merit system is the mechanism that should be used to reward
individual employee performance. It is based on the assumption that agencies
will develop job-based performance evaluation systems for all employees and
that management will accurately assess employee performance. Of course, there
will be cases in which poor management decisions are made. However, this does
not negate the validity of a merit increase system.
We recommend the Legislature encourage
agencies to use both of these programs. In addition, we recommend that the
Legislature consider assisting agencies by providing some funding for merit
increases. A General Appropriations Act, Article IX rider could show
legislative intent. Should the Legislature decide to provide some funding to
agencies to grant merit increases, this rider would grant the authority to do
so without establishing a merit increase cap. We offer the following suggested
language:
"It is the intent of the Legislature that agencies use merit increases and
one-time merit increases to reward employees for outstanding performance. Any
funds appropriated by the Legislature to an agency for merit increases shall
not be considered a cap on these funds. Agencies may grant additional merit
increases for documented employee performance out of other appropriated
funds."
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002 SAO Report No. 03-701
Chapter 3 Compensation System Technical Change Recommendations
We believe some technical changes need to
be made to the State's compensation system to provide consistent salary
schedules, to ensure that certain jobs maintain relative competitiveness with
the market and appropriate alignment with other state jobs, to give agencies
more flexibility, and to maintain a consistent Classification Plan.
Modify Salary Schedule A
To make Salary Schedule A easier for
agencies to use, we recommend the following changes, for which there is no
fiscal impact:
1. Delete the defined salary steps in
each salary range.
Currently, the defined salary
steps force agencies to choose from a limited number of salary amounts.
Eliminating the steps within Salary Schedule A will give agencies increased
flexibility to make hiring decisions and appropriate salary adjustments for
merit increases and promotions. Removing the steps from Salary Schedule A will
allow the creation of more uniform range widths.
2. Expand the salary ranges to provide
more uniform range widths.
General compensation principles
state that the difference between the minimum and maximum salaries in salary
ranges for lower-level service, production, and maintenance jobs should be
between 20 and 25 percent. The difference between the minimum and the maximum
in salary ranges for clerical, technical, and paraprofessional jobs should be
between 30 and 40 percent. Currently, Salary Schedule A ranges reflect differences
from 20 to 33 percent between the minimum and maximum and therefore need to be
expanded to stay in line with industry standards.
Our recommendations for the revised
Salary Schedule A are found in Appendix 3.
Modify Salary Schedule B
We recommend a minor technical change to
the lower salary ranges of Salary Schedule B. When the 4 percent/$ 100 month
pay raise was implemented during the 77th Legislative Session, an unintended
salary range compression occurred in the first five salary groups of Salary Schedule
B. We recommend increasing the maximum of these salary ranges so the full range
will be consistent with a minimum 35 percent salary range spread, which was the
original intent of Schedule B approved during the 77th Legislature. There is no
cost to make this change. See Appendix 4 for the suggested modifications to
Schedule B. 15
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002 SAO Report No. 03-701
Reallocation: Changing a position from one salary group to a
different salary group to bring positions with salary ranges that are
significantly behind the market more in line with the market.
Eliminate
Dual Versions of the
Salary Schedules
During the 77th Legislative Session, the
Legislature approved a salary increase for employees with certain lengths of
service. A technical result of this was the creation of dual salary schedules
for A, B, and C. We believe that these dual schedules should be deleted for the
next biennium. This deletion would mean that all state employees would need to
be paid at the minimum of the salary schedules that include the 4 percent
increase from the 77th session. Note that the 2002 2003 biennium General
Appropriations Act, Article IX, Section 10.12 (j), indicated intent for all
salary schedules to reflect the 4 percent salary increase as of September 1,
2003.
We estimate that 20,000 employees could
be hired between September 1, 2002, and September 1, 2003, and some of these
employees could be hired at salaries below the minimum of the proposed
schedules. We recommend that these employees' salaries be brought to the
minimum of the proposed schedules by the end of the next biennium (August 31,
2005). As a temporary measure, these employees would be
"green-circled," which means that the rate paid to the employees
would be below the established salary range minimums for their specific jobs.
Agencies can gradually move green-circled employees to the minimum of the
salary ranges during the biennium.
Reallocate
Job Classes With Salary
Ranges That Are Significantly Behind the Market
The State's salary schedules define the
salary ranges for specific jobs. We analyze how competitive the midpoints for
specific jobs are in relation to the market. When a job's salary range falls
significantly behind the external labor market, the job becomes out of
alignment with other state jobs. Other factors such as employee turnover, use
of the full salary range, and recruitment issues also factor into our analysis.
In cases in which the job's salary range appears to be out of alignment, we
recommend that the job be reallocated to a higher salary group to maintain its
relative position to other state jobs and to stay within an acceptable salary
range in comparison with the job market. Employees in these job classes move to
higher salary groups and may receive salary increases in order to get to the
new minimum pay rate.
Based on our analysis, we recommend that
15 job classes be reallocated. The estimated cost is $472,000 for the biennium.
These reallocations will help ensure internal and external pay equity. Our
specific reallocation recommendations can be found in Appendix 5.
We also recommend that the reallocation
language be modified to provide more flexibility to agencies in moving
employees in the salary range. Currently, the statute is very specific and
allows an employee to receive only up to a 6.8 percent increase
for Salary Schedule B and no more than a
two-step increase for Salary Schedule A. Our specific statute change
recommendations can be found in Appendix 6. Chapter 3-E
Update the Classification Plan
According to the "Grading the States
1999: A Management Report Card" published by Governing magazine,
the most commendable statewide human resource function for the State of Texas
is the Position Classification Plan (Plan) due to the low number of job classes
in the Plan. In addition to the high marks given to the Plan by Governing, a
recent survey by the State Auditor's Office indicated that agencies gave the
Plan above-average scores for its flexibility, adaptability, and promotion of
internal equity. To ensure the continued success of the Plan, we recommend the
following routine maintenance changes, which are further detailed in Appendix
5.
Add 32 new job classes to the Plan to
accommodate new duties and job functions. Although our aim has been to reduce
the number of job classes within the Plan, these additions will provide greater
consistency in pay across state agencies and ensure that the Plan better
reflects the duties of the position, labor market, and needs of state agencies.
Delete 43 job classes that are unused or
underused or that have midpoints that are significantly below market pay. The
estimated minimum cost for the biennium is approximately $185,000. The majority
of this cost is incurred from deleting the
entry-level Programmer job class and
reclassifying current incumbents upward to the next salary group for the
series. The Legislature may consider funding these deletions or recommend that
agencies absorb the cost for these changes. Deleting these job classes will
further streamline the Plan. See Appendix 5 for a breakdown of these costs.
Delete nine job classes because other job
classes in the Plan will adequately cover the job duties. There are no direct
costs associated with these deletions. Deleting these job classes will further
streamline the Plan. Agencies may incur a cost for these changes depending on
how they choose to reclassify employees affected by the deletions.
Rename eight job class titles that are
outdated in Salary Schedules A and B. In addition, rename 55 job class titles
in Salary Schedule A and B in order to create title consistency within a job
class series. There are no direct costs associated with the title changes, and
the changes will make the Plan more adaptable for agencies.
Reorganize Salary Schedule C to
streamline the plan. This reorganization will consolidate the levels within the
job class series and group the levels within the trooper, game warden, agent,
and investigators of internal affairs job class series.
This will result in the creation of 5 new
job class titles and the deletion of 25 job class titles. In addition, rename
five job class titles that are outdated. These changes are necessary because of
the recommended revisions to Salary Schedule C and have no direct cost
associated with them. 17
The cumulative effect of the recommended
Plan changes would reduce the number of job classes in the Plan from 907 to
866. We believe agencies can accommodate most of these changes within their
current budgets. The cost of implementing them will vary depending on how the
agencies choose to reclassify their employees affected by the Plan changes.
These decisions must be made by agencies based on the proper classification of
positions, internal salary relationships, and budget constraints.
Give Agencies Additional
Flexibility
We believe two additional statutory
changes will assist agencies with employee pay issues. The first is to increase
the amount agencies are authorized to give for employee rewards. Agencies may
buy awards to present to employees for professional achievement or outstanding
service. Currently, the maximum amount of these awards is $50. We recommend
that this amount be increased to $100. Our specific statute change
recommendations can be found in Appendix 6.
Secondly, we believe that agencies should
be granted additional authority to move employees' salaries within their salary
ranges for reasons other than performance. Market conditions can change
quickly, and agencies need the flexibility to respond to those conditions and
to more effectively recruit and retain employees. This new authority would
allow agencies to move an employee's salary when the employee's skills are in
great demand. A recent example of this was when computer
programmers were in high demand. State agencies needed the flexibility to move
employees' salaries to retain programmers. In addition, agencies needed to
adjust current employees' salaries due to salary compression that occurred as a
result of new hires being offered high salaries because of the tight market.
Demand for certain jobs rises and falls, but this flexibility is an important
tool agencies can use to address salary issues. Our specific statute change
recommendations can be found in Appendix 6.
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002
SAO Report No. 03-701
Compensation
Philosophy
A compensation philosophy forms the
foundation of a strong compensation system. It provides a framework for the
Legislature to make decisions relating to state employee pay issues. It also
helps communicate to agency management and employees how the compensation
system works.
Chapter 4 The
Legislature Should Formalize the State's Compensation Philosophy
Maintaining a strong and competitive
compensation system ensures that the State will be able to obtain and keep the
workforce necessary to provide service to the citizens of Texas. By developing
a specific compensation philosophy that lays out legislative intent, the
Legislature will have set the specific framework of how to pay employees and
will be able to focus on funding options. We recommend that the Legislature
adopt a formal philosophy that specifically addresses how the State will
address the three components of total compensationsalary, benefits, and
retirement. A concurrent resolution outlining the State's compensation
philosophy could be used for this purpose. Our complete recommendation for
the compensation philosophy can be found on page iii of the report.
Page 20 This page intentionally left blank. 20
A Biennial Report on Recommended Changes
to the State's Compensation System for Fiscal Years 2004 2005 September 2002
SAO Report No. 03-701
Appendix 1 Objectives, Scope and Methodology
Objectives The objectives of
this study were to determine whether:
The State's salary structures are competitive with the appropriate labor
market.
Classified employees' salaries are competitive with those of employees in
similar
jobs in government and industry.
The Position Classification Plan (Plan)
requires any realignment, additions, or deletions of positions. Other aspects
of the State's compensation system could be enhanced.
Scope The scope of this
study included a review of current salary ranges, employee pay in relation to
market pay, and placement of positions within the Plan. The State
Classification Office (SCO) conducted this review in accordance with the
Position Classification Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 654, which requires
the SCO to: Make periodic studies of
salary rates in other governmental units and in industry for similar work
performed in state government and to report those findings and recommendations
for adjusting state salary ranges. Maintain and keep current the Plan. Make
necessary and desirable recommendations to improve the Plan.
Methodology The SCO in the
State Auditor's Office conducts periodic studies of salary rates and trends in
private industry and other governmental agencies for work similar to that
performed in state government. In addition, the SCO is responsible for
reviewing the Plan and providing recommendations in order to ensure that the
Plan effectively meets the needs of its users. Together, the salary structure
and the Plan make up the State's compensation system. In developing our
recommendations, the SCO analyzed the following: Consumer Price Index 21
Salary Schedules A, B, and C, which
reflect the four percent increase approved during the 77th Legislative Session
Market salaries for benchmarked
positions. These positions represent a broad spectrum of various jobs in the
State's pay schedules and occupational groups. Benchmark positions were compared
with positions in the relevant labor market for the State of Texas by using the
following surveys that captured wage data. 2001 Central States Survey 2001/
2002 Watson Wyatt ECS Hospital and Health Care Professionals, Nursing and
Allied Service Personnel Compensation Report For Profit Data
2001/ 2002 Watson Wyatt Geographic
Reports on Compensation For Profit Data
2002 Hay Local Area Pay Survey Austin
Area
Compensation Data Texas, The 2001 Texas Wage and Salary Survey
Private Sector and Public Sector Data
Economic Research Institution
Geographic and Salary Assessor Texas,
February 2002 Data
Salaries for law enforcement officers in
Texas municipalities, compiled from
research conducted by the SCO, September 2002
Texas Association of Counties, Salary
Survey, April 2002
Texas Municipal League's Salary and Fringe Benefits Survey, April 2002
The Quorum Group, 2001 Texas Wage and Salary Survey
Sources used to compile data for full-time classified state employees and their
salaries:
Average salary for each job class/ class
series as of the first quarter of fiscal
year 2002
Salary data for cost-of-living estimates
as of the third quarter of fiscal year
2002
The number of incumbents in each job
class/ class series as of the first quarter of fiscal year 2002
Turnover data for each job class/ class
series as of the first quarter of fiscal year 2002
Use of the salary ranges as of the second
quarter of fiscal year 2002
Other survey sources and research were
gathered from the following:
Letters from individual agencies, which
included research and recommendations
Survey of agency human resources
directors conducted by SCO
Texas Government Code
The cost of implementing all of the recommendations to the Plan was
approximated and annualized; however, the cost to the State for the biennium is
provided because implementation costs are incurred for the entire biennium. The
costs were estimated as follows:
To determine the cost of implementing the
recommendations for reallocations and deletions to job classes within the Plan,
we used the number of full-time classified employees in each of the affected
classes as of the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2002. We extracted
this information from the Comptroller of Public Accounts Human Resource
Information System and Uniform Statewide Payroll/ Personnel System. The minimum
estimated costs for implementing the reallocations were calculated by moving
the affected incumbents to the same salary rate within the appropriate salary
group of the new or revised class, or to the minimum rate of the higher salary
group, whichever was higher. The cost for implementing the cost-of-living
salary adjustments was calculated by multiplying the total payroll of eligible
employees by 75 percent of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) using third quarter
data from fiscal year 2002.
The following members of the State
Auditor's staff conducted this review in accordance with the Position
Classification Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 654:
Stacey Robbins McClure, PHR (Project Manager)
Sharon Schneider, PHR (Project Manager)
Christine Bailey, CCP
Steve Pearson, PHR, IPMA-CP
Floyd Quinn, M. Ed., PHR
Juliette Torres, CCP, PHR
Tony Garrant, PHR (Assistant State Classification Officer)
Kelli Vito, CCP, PHR (State Classification Officer) 23
Page 24 this
page intentionally left blank.
Appendix 2
Proposed Salaries and Classifications for Salary Schedule
C
The SCO recommends reorganizing Salary
Schedule C to streamline the Plan. This reorganization would consolidate levels
C2 through C6 of the existing structure and group the levels within the
trooper, game warden, agent, and investigators of internal affairs job class
series. The SCO recommends that Salary Schedule C salary groups be renumbered to
reflect the proposed modifications.
Table 3 Fiscal Year 2004 Salary Schedule C
Reorganization
|
Salary Rates |
< 4 Years |
4 Years |
8 Years |
12 Years |
16 Years |
|
C1 |
$30,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
C2 |
$33,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
C3 |
$36,400 |
$38,896 |
$41,392 |
$43,888 |
$46,384 |
|
C4 |
|
$45,136 |
$47,632 |
$50,128 |
$52,624 |
|
C5 |
|
$51,376 |
$53,872 |
$56,368 |
$58,864 |
|
C6 |
|
$57,616 |
$60,112 |
$62,608 |
$65,104 |
|
C7 |
|
$69,264 |
$69,264 |
$69,264 |
$69,264 |
|
C8 |
|
$73,424 |
$73,424 |
$73,424 |
$73,424 |
Table 4 Fiscal Year 2005 Salary Schedule C
Reorganization
|
Salary Rates |
< 4 Years |
4 Years |
8 Years |
12 Years |
16 Years |
|
C1 |
$30,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
C2 |
$34,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
C3 |
$37,200 |
$39,696 |
$42,192 |
$44,688 |
$47,184 |
|
C4 |
|
$48,000 |
$50,496 |
$52,992 |
$55,488 |
|
C5 |
|
$54,240 |
$56,736 |
$59,232 |
$61,728 |
|
C6 |
|
$60,480 |
$62,976 |
$65,472 |
$67,968 |
|
C7 |
|
$72,120 |
$72,120 |
$72,120 |
$72,120 |
|
C8 |
|
$76,272 |
$76,272 |
$76,272 |
$76,272 |
Table 5 Salary Schedule C Group Renumbering
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMIS S ION
C1 Agent Trainee C2 Agent
Trainee
C2 Agent I Delete
C3 Agent II Delete
C4 Agent III Delete
C5 Agent IV Delete
C6 Agent V Delete
C3 Agent
Justification: Change the salary group for the Agent Trainee to
reflect the new salary group for Salary Schedule C. Delete the entire Agent job
class series (Levels I V) and create a new general Agent job class. This new
job class (C3) will provide a
broad salary range similar to that
provided by the deleted levels and will have the longevity-based steps built
into the new
C3 level.
C7 Sergeant, Alcoholic Beverage C4 Sergeant,
Alcoholic Beverage
C8 Lieutenant, Alcoholic Beverage C5 Lieutenant, Alcoholic Beverage
C9 Captain, Alcoholic Beverage C6 Captain, Alcoholic Beverage
C10 Major, Alcoholic Beverage C8 Major, Alcoholic Beverage
Justification: Renumber the salary groups for the officer job
class series to reflect the new salary groups for Salary Schedule C.
DEPARTMENT OF CR I M I N A L J UST I C
E
C1 Internal Affairs Investigator
Trainee C1 Investigator Trainee Office of the Inspector General
C2 Internal Affairs Investigator I Delete
C3 Internal Affairs Investigator II Delete
C4 Internal Affairs Investigator III Delete
C5 Internal Affairs Investigator IV Delete
C6 Internal Affairs Investigator V Delete
C3 Investigator Office of the
Inspector General
Justification: Rename the job class to reflect the new name of
the division that uses it. Delete the entire Internal Affairs Investigator job
class series (Levels I V) and create a new general Investigator Office of
Inspector General job class. This
new job class (C3) will provide a broad salary range similar to that provided
by the deleted levels and will have the longevity-based
steps built into it.
C7 Internal Affairs Regional Supervisor C4
Sergeant, Inspector Office of the Inspector General
C8 Internal Affairs Regional Manager C5 Lieutenant, Inspector Office
of the Inspector General
C9 Internal Affairs Multi-Regional Administrator C6 Captain, Inspector
Office of the Inspector General
C10 Internal Affairs Deputy Division Director C8 Chief Inspector, Office
of the Inspector General
Justification: Rename the job class series to reflect the new
name of the division using it. Renumber the salary groups for the officer job
class series to reflect the new salary groups for Salary Schedule C.
*Bold text designates a recommended
change. 26
Salary Group Classification Title
Salary Group* Classification Title*
DEPARTMENT OF P U B L I C S AFETY
C1 Trooper Trainee C1 Trooper
Trainee
C1 Probationary Trooper C2 Probationary Trooper
C2 Trooper I Delete
C3 Trooper II Delete
C4 Trooper III Delete
C5 Trooper IV Delete
C6 Trooper V Delete
C3 Trooper
Justification: Change the salary group for the Probationary
Trooper to reflect the new salary group for Salary Schedule C. Delete the
entire Trooper job class series (Levels I V) and create a new general Trooper
job class. This new job class (C3)
will provide a broad salary range similar
to that provided by the deleted levels and will have the longevity-based steps
built
into it.
C2 Corporal I Delete
C3 Corporal II Delete
C4 Corporal III Delete
C5 Corporal IV Delete
C6 Corporal V Delete
C3 Corporal
Justification: Delete the entire Corporal job class series
(Levels I V) and create a new general Corporal job class. This new job class
(C3) will provide a broad salary range similar to that provided by the deleted
levels and will have the longevity-based steps built into it.
C7 Sergeant, Public Safety C4 Sergeant, Public Safety
C8 Lieutenant, Public Safety C5 Lieutenant, Public Safety
C9 Captain, Public Safety C6 Captain, Public Safety
C10 Assistant Commander, Public Safety C7 Assistant Commander, Public
Safety
C10 Commander, Public Safety C8 Commander, Public Safety
C10 Major, Public Safety C8 Major, Public Safety
Justification: Renumber the salary groups for the officer job
class series to reflect the new salary groups for Salary Schedule C.
C7 Pilot Investigator I C4 Pilot
Investigator I
C8 Pilot Investigator II C5 Pilot Investigator II
C9 Pilot Investigator III C6 Pilot Investigator III
C10 Pilot Investigator IV C7 Pilot Investigator IV
Justification: Renumber the salary groups for the pilot
investigator job class series to reflect the new salary groups for Salary
Schedule C.
C8 Public Safety Inspector I C5 Public
Safety Inspector I
C9 Public Safety Inspector II C6 Public Safety Inspector II
Justification: Renumber the salary groups for the public safety
inspector job class series to reflect the new salary groups for Salary Schedule
C.
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Salary Group Classification Title
Salary Group* Classification Title*
PARKS AND WI L DLI FE DEPARTMENT
C1 Game Warden Trainee C1 Game
Warden Trainee
C1 Probationary Game Warden C2 Probationary Game Warden
C2 Game Warden I Delete
C3 Game Warden II Delete
C4 Game Warden III Delete
C5 Game Warden IV Delete
C6 Game Warden V Delete
C3 Game Warden
Justification: Change the salary group for the Probationary Game
Warden to reflect the new salary group for Salary Schedule C. Delete the entire
Game Warden job class series (Levels I V) and create a new general Game Warden
job class. This new job class (C3) will provide a salary range similar to that
provided by the deleted levels and will have the longevity-based steps built
into it.
C7 Sergeant, Game Warden C4 Sergeant,
Game Warden
C8 Lieutenant, Game Warden C5 Lieutenant, Game Warden
C9 Captain, Game Warden C6 Captain, Game Warden
C10 Assistant Commander, Game Warden C7 Assistant Commander, Game Warden
C10 Commander, Game Warden C8 Commander, Game Warden
C10 Major, Game Warden C8 Major, Game Warden
Justification: Change the salary groups for the officer job class
series to reflect the new salary groups for Salary Schedule C.
*Bold text designates a recommended
change. 28
Appendix 3
Revised Salary Schedule A
Salary Current Salary Group Ranges
Proposed Salary Group Ranges Group
Minimum Maximum Range Width Minimum Maximum Range Width
A02
$15,576 $18,732
20% $15,576 $19,476
25%
A03 $16,308 $19,644
20% $16,308 $20,376
25%
A04 $17,064 $20,652
21% $17,064 $21,336
25%
A05 $17,856 $21,792
22% $17,856 $22,320
25%
A06 $18,732 $22,944
22% $18,732 $23,412
25%
A07 $19,644 $24,252
23% $19,644 $24,552
25%
A08 $20,652 $25,632
24% $20,652 $25,812
25%
A09 $21,792 $27,132
25% $21,792 $27,240
25%
A10 $22,944 $28,740
25% $22,944 $30,972
35%
A11 $24,252 $30,432
25% $24,252 $32,736
35%
A12 $25,632 $33,024
29% $25,632 $34,608
35%
A13 $27,132 $34,836
28% $27,132 $36,624
35%
A14 $28,740 $37,548
31% $28,740 $38,796
35%
A15 $30,432 $39,864
31% $30,432 $41,088
35%
A16 $32,316 $42,864
33% $32,316 $43,620
35%
A17 $34,308 $45,780
33% $34,308 $46,320
35%
A18 $36,504 $48,420
33% $36,504 $49,284
35% 29
Page 30 This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix 4
Revised Salary Schedule B
Salary Current Salary Group Ranges
Proposed Salary Group Ranges
Group Minimum Maximum Range Width Minimum Maximum Range Width
B1 ... $21,792 ... $29,004 ... 33% ... $21,792 ...
$29,424 ... 35% ...
B2 ... $22,944 ... $30,552 ... 33% ... $22,944 ... $30,972 ... 35% ...
B3 ... $24,252 ... $32,364 ... 33% ... $24,252 ... $32,736 ... 35% ...
B4 ... $25,632 ... $34,308 ... 34% ... $25,632 ... $34,608 ... 35% ...
B5 ... $27,132 ... $36,408 ... 34% ... $27,132 ... $36,624 ... 35% ...
B6 ... $28,740 ... $38,664 ... 35% ... $28,740 ... $38,664 ... 35% ...
B7 ... $30,432 ... $41,052 ... 35% ... $30,432 ... $41,052 ... 35% ...
B8 ... $32,316 ... $43,620 ... 35% ... $32,316 ... $43,620 ... 35% ...
B9 ... $34,308 ... $46,320 ... 35% ... $34,308 ... $46,320 ... 35% ...
B10 ... $36,504 ... $52,932 ... 45% ... $36,504 ... $52,932 ... 45% ...
B11 ... $38,832 ... $56,304 ... 45% ... $38,832 ... $56,304 ... 45% ...
B12 ... $41,304 ... $59,880 ... 45% ... $41,304 ... $59,880 ... 45% ...
B13 ... $43,908 ... $63,672 ... 45% ... $43,908 ... $63,672 ... 45% ...
B14 ... $46,728 ... $67,764 ... 45% ... $46,728 ... $67,764 ... 45% ...
B15 ... $49,740 ... $77,100 ... 55% ... $49,740 ... $77,100 ... 55% ...
B16 ... $52,992 ... $82,140 ... 55% ... $52,992 ... $82,140 ... 55% ...
B17 ... $56,436 ... $87,480 ... 55% ... $56,436 ... $87,480 ... 55% ...
B18 ... $60,132 ... $93,204 ... 55% ... $60,132 ... $93,204 ... 55% ...
B19 ... $67,968 ... $105,348 ... 55% ... $67,968 ... $105,348 ... 55%
...
B20 ... $76,884 ... $119,160 ... 55% ... $76,884 ... $119,160 ... 55%
...
B21 ... $97,104 ... $150,504 ... 55% ... $97,104 ... $150,504 ... 55%
...
B22 ... $122,820 ... $190,380 ... 55% ... $122,820 ... $190,380 ... 55%
...
Page 32 This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix 5
Classification Plan Recommendations
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
B11 Actuary I Delete
B13 Actuary II Actuary I
B15 Actuary III Actuary II
B17 Actuary IV Actuary III
B19 Actuary V Actuary IV
B21 Actuary VI Actuary V
B22 Chief Actuary
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used. Change
the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A8 Administrative Technician I Administrative
Assistant I
A11 Administrative Technician II Administrative
Assistant II
A13 Administrative Technician III Administrative
Assistant III
A15 Administrative Technician IV Administrative
Assistant IV
Justification: Change the title of Administrative Technician to
Administrative Assistant to be consistent with industry standards.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B6 Appellate Court Peace Officer Delete
Justification: Delete the Appellate Court Peace Officer because it is not
used.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B5 Archeologist I B7
B7 Archeologist II B9
B9 Archeologist III B11
B13 Archeologist IV
Justification: Move series up by two salary groups and add a
level to accommodate higher-level job duties and employee skills. These
adjustments will bring the series more in line with the market and will promote
consistency within the Plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $64,272
B9 Architect I Delete
B10 Architect II Architect I
B11 Architect III Architect II
B12 Architect IV Architect III
B13 Architect V Architect IV
B15 Architect V
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used. Add
a level to accommodate higher-level job duties and employee skills, bring
series more in line with the market, and promote consistency within the Plan.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
*Bold text designates a recommended
change. 33
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
B9 Assistant Attorney General I B10
B11 Assistant Attorney General II
B13 Assistant Attorney General III
B15 Assistant Attorney General IV
B17 Assistant Attorney General V
B19 Assistant Attorney General VI
B20 Assistant Attorney General VII
B21 First Assistant Attorney General
Justification: Move the first level up by one salary group to
bring the job class more in line with the market. Approximate Biennium Cost:
$74,050
B9 Attorney I B10
B11 Attorney II
B13 Attorney III
B15 Attorney IV
B17 Attorney V
B19 Attorney VI
Justification: Move the first level up by one salary group to
bring the job class more in line with the market. Approximate Biennium Cost:
$70,312
B5 Auditor I B6
B7 Auditor II
B9 Auditor III
B11 Auditor IV
B13 Auditor V
B15 Auditor VI
Justification: Move the first level up by one salary group to
bring the job class more in line with the market.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $62,449
B10 Benefit Review Officer I Delete
B12 Benefit Review Officer II Benefit Review Officer
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the title of the remaining job class to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B13 Business Continuity Coordinator I
B15 Business Continuity Coordinator II
B17 Business Continuity Coordinator III
Justification: Create a new Business Continuity Coordinator
series to accommodate the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B22 Chief Investment Officer
Justification: Reinstate job
class to accommodate work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
B1 Child Development Specialist I
Delete
B3 Child Development Specialist II Delete
B5 Child Development Specialist III Delete
B7 Child Development Specialist IV Delete
B9 Child Development Specialist V Delete
Justification: Delete the entire series because of low use. The
Rehabilitation Teacher series can accommodate the duties performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B6 Crime Scene Photographer I Delete
B7 Crime Scene Photographer II Crime Scene Photographer I
B9 Crime Scene Photographer III Crime Scene Photographer II
B11 Crime Scene Photographer IV Crime Scene Photographer III
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B8 Data Base Administrator I
B10 Data Base Administrator II
B12 Data Base Administrator III
B14 Data Base Administrator IV
B16 Data Base Administrator V
B18 Data Base Administrator VI
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills. This adjustment will bring the series more in line
with the market and promote consistency within the Plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B16 Dentist I B17
B18 Dentist II B19
B21 Dentist III
Justification: Move the series up by one salary group to bring
the series more in line with the market. Create an additional level to
accommodate higher-level job duties and employee skills.
Approximate Cost: $1,550
B21 Deputy Executive Director, Texas Procurement Commission Delete
Justification: Delete job class due to overlap in job duties within the
Plan. The general Director series or Deputy Director job class can be used to
accommodate the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B5 Deputy State Fire Marshal I Delete
B7 Deputy State Fire Marshal II Delete
B9 Deputy State Fire Marshal III Delete
B11 Deputy State Fire Marshal IV Delete
Justification: Delete entire series because it is not used.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
B3 Dietitian I Delete
B5 Dietitian II Delete
B7 Dietitian III Dietitian
Justification: Delete the first two levels because they are not
used. Change the title of the remaining job class to accommodate the deletions.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A8 Drafting Technician I Delete
A11 Drafting Technician II Drafting Technician I
A13 Drafting Technician III Drafting Technician II
A15 Drafting Technician IV Drafting Technician III
A17 Drafting Technician V Drafting Technician IV
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A11 Electrical and Air Conditioning Mechanic I Delete
A12 Electrical and Air Conditioning Mechanic II Delete
A14 Electrical and Air Conditioning Mechanic III Delete
A16 Electrical and Air Conditioning Mechanic IV Delete
Justification: Delete entire series. Create two new series (see
entries for Electrician and HVAC Mechanic) to accommodate the electrician and
air conditioning mechanic job duties separately.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A12 Electrician I
A14 Electrician II
A16 Electrician III
A18 Electrician IV
Justification: Add series to better accommodate the work
performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B5 Evidence/ CODIS/ DNA Technician Crime
Lab Evidence Technician
Justification: Change title to clarify the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A8 Fish and Wildlife Technician I
A10 Fish and Wildlife Technician II
A13 Fish and Wildlife Technician III
A15 Fish and Wildlife Technician IV
A17 Fish and Wildlife Technician V
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills. This adjustment brings the series more in line with
the market and promotes consistency within the plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
*Bold text designates a recommended change.
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
A9 Food Service Manager I
A11 Food Service Manager II
A13 Food Service Manager II A14 Food Service Manager III
A16 Food Service Manager III Food Service Manager IV
Justification: Create a level and move the current Food Service
Manager II job class up by one salary group. Both of these adjustments will
ensure consistency in the Plan with the Laundry Manager series. Change the titles
to accommodate the addition.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $64,464
B9 Geologist I
B10 Geologist II
B11 Geologist III
B12 Geologist IV
B13 Geologist V
B15 Geologist VI
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills. The adjustment brings the series more in line with
the market and promotes consistency within the Plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B15 Governor's Advisor I Delete
B18 Governor's Advisor II Delete
B20 Governor's Advisor III Delete
B21 Governor's Advisor IV Delete
Justification: Exempt the series from the Plan and set a
not-to-exceed rate to give Governor authority to set appropriate salary ranges.
We recommend a not-to-exceed rate of $150,504.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A2 Human Services Technician I Delete
A4 Human Services Technician II Human
Services Technician I
A6 Human Services Technician III Human
Services Technician II
A7 Human Services Technician IV Human
Services Technician III
A9 Human Services Technician V Human
Services Technician IV
Justification: Delete the first level because of low use. Change
the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $1,512
A11 HVAC Mechanic I
A12 HVAC Mechanic II
A14 HVAC Mechanic III
A16 HVAC Mechanic IV
Justification: Create a new series to better accommodate the work
performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B6 Hydrologist Assistant I Delete
B7 Hydrologist Assistant II Delete
B8 Hydrologist Assistant III Hydrologist Assistant
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
Justification: Delete the first
two levels because they are not used. Change the title of the remaining job class
to accommodate the deletions.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B9 Hydrologist I
B10 Hydrologist II
B11 Hydrologist III
B12 Hydrologist IV
B13 Hydrologist V
B15 Hydrologist VI
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills. This adjustment will bring the series more in line
with the market and promote consistency within the Plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B3 Interpreter I Delete
B6 Interpreter II Interpreter I
B8 Interpreter III Interpreter II
B10 Interpreter IV Interpreter III
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A9 Licensed Vocational Nurse I
A11 Licensed Vocational Nurse II
A13 Licensed Vocational Nurse III
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A3 Maintenance Assistant A4
Justification: Move job class up by one salary group to bring the job class
more in line with the market. Approximate Biennium Cost: $18,120
B15 Manager of External Money Managers I Delete
B17 Manager of External Money Managers II Delete
B19 Manager of External Money Managers III Delete
Justification: Delete the entire series because it is not used.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B6 Nurse I
B8 Nurse II
B10 Nurse III
B12 Nurse IV
B13 Nurse V
B15 Nurse Practitioner
Justification: Create a Nurse Practitioner job class to
accommodate the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
B6 Park Manager I Park
Specialist I
B8 Park Manager II Park Specialist II
B10 Park Manager III Park Specialist III
Justification: Change title to reflect the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B12 Pharmacist I Delete
B14 Pharmacist II B15 Pharmacist I
B16 Pharmacist III Pharmacist II
Justification: Delete the first level because of low use. Change
the titles of the remaining classes to accommodate the deletion. Move the new
Pharmacist I up by one salary group to bring the job class more in line with
the market.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $64,379
B15 Pharmacologist I Delete
B16 Pharmacologist II Delete
Justification: Delete the entire series because of low use. The
Pharmacist series can be used to accommodate the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B10 Resident Physician
B19 Physician I Delete
B20 Physician II Physician I
B21 Physician III Physician II
B22 Physician IV Physician III
Justification: Create a new job class to accommodate the work
performed. Delete the first level of the current series because it is not used.
This adjustment will bring the job series more in line with the market.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B9 Program Administrator I
B10 Program Administrator II
B11 Program Administrator III
B12 Program Administrator IV
B13 Program Administrator V
B15 Program Administrator VI
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills. This adjustment will bring the series more in line
with the market and promote consistency within the Plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B6 Programmer I Delete
B8 Programmer II Programmer I
B10 Programmer III Programmer II
B12 Programmer IV Programmer III
B14 Programmer V Programmer IV
B16 Programmer VI Programmer V
B18 Programmer VI
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
Justification: Delete the first
level because of low use. Create a level to accommodate higher-level job duties
and employee skills. Both changes will bring the series more in line with the
market. Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the
deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $146,247
B8 Property Manager I
B10 Property Manager III
B12 Property Manager III
Justification: Create a new series to accommodate the work
performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B19 Psychiatrist I Delete
B20 Psychiatrist II Psychiatrist I
B21 Psychiatrist III Psychiatrist II
B22 Psychiatrist IV Psychiatrist III
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B3 Sanitarian I Delete
B5 Sanitarian II Sanitarian I
B7 Sanitarian III Sanitarian II
B9 Sanitarian IV Sanitarian III
B11 Sanitarian V Sanitarian IV
B13 Sanitarian VI Sanitarian V
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A5 Secretary I Delete
A6 Secretary II Delete
A8 Secretary III Delete
A10 Secretary IV Delete
Justification: Delete the entire series to reduce the overlap in
job duties within the Plan. The Clerk or Administrative Assistant series can be
used to accommodate the work performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A8 Seed Technician I Delete
A10 Seed Technician II Seed Technician I
A12 Seed Technician III Seed Technician II
A14 Seed Technician IV Seed Technician III
A16 Seed Technician V Seed Technician IV
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B7 Social Service Supervisor I Delete
B8 Social Service Supervisor II Delete
*Bold text designates a recommended
change. 40
Current Recommended
Salary Group Classification Title Salary Group* Classification Title*
Justification: Delete entire
series because it is not used.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B3 Social Service Worker I Delete
B4 Social Service Worker II Delete
B5 Social Service Worker III Delete
Justification: Delete entire series because it is not used.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B1 Statistician I Delete
B4 Statistician II B5 Statistician I
B7 Statistician III B8 Statistician II
B9 Statistician IV B10 Statistician III
Justification: Delete the first level within the series. We find
the Statistician I job duties to be more administrative in nature. Employees
within this job class can be appropriately classified within the Clerk or
Administrative Assistant series.
Move the remaining Statistician job
classes up one salary group to bring the series more in line with the market. Approximate
Biennium Cost: $68,232
B8 Systems Analyst I
B10 Systems Analyst II
B12 Systems Analyst III
B14 Systems Analyst IV
B16 Systems Analyst V
B18 Systems Analyst VI
Justification: Create a level to accommodate higher-level job
duties and employee skills. This adjustment will bring the series more in line
with the market and promote consistency within the Plan.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
B12 Trader I Delete
B16 Trader II Trader I
B19 Trader III Trader II
Justification: Delete the first level because it is not used.
Change the titles of the remaining job classes to accommodate the deletion.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
A2 Vehicle Driver I A3
A5 Vehicle Driver II
A7 Vehicle Driver III
A9 Vehicle Driver IV
Justification: Move the first level up by one salary group to
bring the job class more in line with the market.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $21,240
B10 Web Administrator I
B11 Web Administrator II
B13 Web Administrator III
Justification: Create a new series to accommodate the work
performed.
Approximate Biennium Cost: $0
*Bold text designates a recommended
change.
Page 42 This
page intentionally left blank.
Appendix 6
Recommended Statutory Changes
Government Code Section 659.254. REALLOCATION
OR RECLASSIFICATION OF A CLASSIFIED POSITION [REALLOCATED OR RECLASSIFIED TO A
DIFFERENT SALARY GROUP]
(a) This section applies only to
positions classified under the state's position classification plan.
(b) In this section:
(1) "higher salary group" means a salary group with a higher minimum
salary rate; [and]
(2) "lower salary group" means a salary group with a lower minimum
salary rate[.]; and
(3) "same salary group" means a salary group with the same minimum
salary rate.
(c) An employee whose classified position
is reallocated by the General Appropriations Act or reclassified under Chapter
654 to a higher salary group will be paid at the minimum salary rate in the
higher salary group or at the salary rate the employee would have received
without the reallocation or reclassification, whichever rate is higher, except
to maintain desirable salary relationships among employees in the affected
positions, the salary may be adjusted up to [not more than:
(1) two steps higher, if the employee's
salary group is divided into steps by the General
Appropriations Act; or
(2) 6.8 percent higher, if the employee's
salary group is not divided into steps by the General
Appropriations Act.] a percentage above the minimum of the new salary rate in
the new salary group equivalent to the corresponding percentage of the salary
rate held by the employee before the reallocation or the reclassification.
(d) An employee whose classified position
is reallocated by the General Appropriations Act or reclassified under Chapter
654 to a lower salary group will be paid at the salary rate that the employee
would have received had the position not been reallocated or reclassified, not
to exceed the maximum rate of the lower salary group.
(e) To maintain desirable salary
relationships among employees in the affected positions, an employee whose
classified position is reclassified to another position in the same salary
group may be paid at any rate within the salary group range.
Government Code Section 2113.201 EMPLOYEE
AWARDS
(a) A state agency many use appropriated money to purchase service awards,
safety awards, and other similar awards to be presented to its employees for
professional achievement or outstanding service under policies adopted by the
agency.
(b) The cost of awards purchased under
this section may not exceed [$ 50] $100 for an individual employee.
Government Code Section 659.2591 SALARY
ADJUSTMENTS
(a) This section applies only to positions classified under the state's
position classification plan.
(b) Notwithstanding other provisions of this subchapter, agencies are
authorized to adjust a position's salary rate within the salary range of the
applicable salary group for the purpose of maintaining:
(1) equitable internal relationships; or
(2) equitable salary rates in the job market. 43
Page 44 This
page intentionally left blank.
Copies of this report have been
distributed to the following:
Legislative Audit Committee The Honorable James E. "Pete" Laney,
Speaker of the House, Chair The Honorable Bill Ratliff, Lieutenant Governor,
Vice Chair The Honorable Rodney Ellis, Senate Finance Committee The Honorable
Florence Shapiro, Senate State Affairs Committee The Honorable Robert Junell,
House Appropriations Committee The Honorable Rene O. Oliveira, House Ways and
Means Committee
Office of the Governor The Honorable Rick
Perry, Governor
Mr. Mike Morrisey, Director of Budget and Planning
Members of the Senate Finance Committee
Members of the House Appropriations
Committee
Comptroller of Public Accounts The Honorable Carole Keeton Rylander,
Comptroller of Public Accounts
Mr. Billy Hamilton, Deputy Comptroller
Legislative Budget Board Mr. John Keel, CPA,
Director
Page 46
This document is not copyrighted. Readers may make additional copies of this
report as needed. In addition, most State Auditor's Office reports may be
downloaded from our Web site: www.sao.state. tx.us.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this document may also
be requested in alternative formats. To do so, contact Production Services at
(512) 936-9880 (Voice), (512) 936-9400 (FAX), 1-800-RELAY-TX (TDD), or visit
the Robert E. Johnson Building, 1501 North Congress Avenue, Suite 4.224,
Austin, Texas 78701.
The State Auditor's Office is an equal
opportunity employer and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability in employment or in the
provision of services, programs, or activities. To report waste, fraud, or
abuse in state government call the SAO Hotline: 1-800-TX-AUDIT. 46
Chapter 1 The State's Compensation System
Employees' Salaries Are Below Market Pay
Table 1 Examples of
State Employees' and Non-State Employees' Salaries
Law Enforcement Officers' Pay Is Not in Line With
Texas' City Police Department Pay
Chapter 2 Employee Pay Increase Recommendations
Table 2
Characteristics of Four Types of Pay Increases
Provide a Cost-of-Living Increase
Create a Performance Award Fund
Encourage Merit and One-Time Merit Increase
Programs
Chapter 3 Compensation System Technical Change Recommendations
Eliminate Dual Versions of the Salary Schedules
Reallocate Job Classes With Salary Ranges That
Are Significantly Behind the Market
Give Agencies Additional
Flexibility
Chapter 4 The Legislature Should Formalize the State's Compensation
Philosophy
Appendix 1 Objectives, Scope and Methodology
Appendix 2 Proposed Salaries and Classifications for Salary Schedule C
Appendix 3 Revised Salary Schedule A
Appendix 4 Revised Salary Schedule B
Appendix 5 Classification Plan Recommendations
Appendix 6 Recommended Statutory Changes