You are here

Executive Meeting | March 05, 1999

 

TO: PSRC DATE: March 5, 1999.
RE: PSRC Meeting Notes  Friday March 5, 1999.
Attendance: K. Reiniger, J. Yandon, A. Hurst, D. Morris, R.Ruegg, S. Austen, J. Drozdoff, G. Sheffer, A. Trudel

PSRC :

Klaus welcomed the new members and noted the benefits of new representation. He reiterated his comments from the general meeting regarding the attendance, and the PPR process appeals. This is the first year that the PSRC chairman will have a role in evaluation appeals for P&S. Last year there were some appeals, but the results are not known.

Compensation and Classifications : The committee discussed the "Draft Proposal for New Performance Based Salary Administration Program" dated Feb. 10, 1999 which Josie Farrell of Human Resources (HR) had circulated to the employee representative committee executives. There was some discussion of specifics, but in the end, the committee referred the matter to Stu Austen and Roman Ruegg who as a subcommittee of the PSRC will participate in the discussions with HR. From past experience, and in view of an expected change in the organization at the end of Alan Astbury's term as director which has been extended to July 2000, some PSRC are skeptical about the usefulness of this exercise at this time. In the discussion, the following issues were raised:

In general:

   1. Individuals should not suffer loss of compensation or benefits as a result of a new system.
   2. The existing employee representatives must take an active part in the discussions about any new system
   3. Representation for the new employee groupings must be clarified.
   4. Specific to this proposal: There will be 4 families - categories - groups.
          * Does this mean 4 separate salary scales?
          * Will they each require their own employee representatives?
   5. The Admin group appears to be a catch-all.
          * With quite wide range in job functions.
          * How is a computer analyst in the Admin Category different from one in Scientific Support?
   6. The add on concerning Group Leader responsibilities was inconsistent as it alone included mention of salary component for a supervisory responsibility, which may be only one aspect of a job. Furthermore, the salary component was described as being in addition to the base, which may make it exclusive of the pensionable component.

Other Business : The PPR was discussed again with some criticism raised that supervisors who had followed the projected rating profile with a 3.0 median were unhappy to find that the eventual distribution was about a median of 3.7. This resulted in quite a number of problems such as employee dissatisfaction with their rating, loss of supervisor credibility and strained supervisor-employee relationships. This problem may have affected those supervising large groups where statistics were applied as opposed to in small groups where it may be difficult to enforce a distribution. The work plan training was to have been done in February, but hasn't been scheduled yet.

 

Attachment #1.

excerpt from the JCC report August 31, 1984

A New Classification and Compensation System for TRIUMF Employees

Desirable Elements of a New System

Ideally, in an organization, each individual should be classified according to their contribution, on the basis of the work performed. The classification must reflect the types of activities that are involved at a level determined by evaluating various factors including knowledge, experience, responsibility and supervision. A classification system should be applied the same way to all groups, and include progression and promotion guidelines that provide a clear indication of career potential. An appeals procedure would be an integral part of this system.

To ensure that individual classifications remain accurate, the system should include an annual job review. Other desirable elements would be a common salary revision date for all TRIUMF employees and a committee to annually negotiate levels of compensation.

Classification systems exist that consider there and other characteristics so that all employees receive fair treatment in career progression. The immediate task is to devise one that will be appropriate for TRIUMF.