Pay Plan - Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Compensation:

Does the plan to move to the five new pay plans include any provisions for retirees?

There are no provisions affecting retirees or the retirement system included in the implementation of the five new pay plans.

What will happen to the $0.30 hourly retention bonus for maintenance and trades classifications?

During the transition to the new pay plans, the $0.30 hourly retention bonus for maintenance and trades classifications will remain in place. The intent will be to build this into the pay grades of the new plans, once these classifications are fully implemented in the new system.

Will classifications in Group 1 be the only classifications to receive market adjustments in FY2010?

No. Classifications from all three Groups are eligible to receive market adjustments in FY2010.

Isn’t this a pay-for-performance system?

No. The only one of the new pay plans that is truly a pay-for-performance plan is the Management Pay Plan. With all other plans, performance is a factor with respect to pay increases, but is not the only factor. The State’s current plan has a performance component as well, as a satisfactory performance evaluation is necessary for the receipt of a step increase, so performance having an impact on employee compensation is not a new concept.

How much will market adjustments be?

Since market adjustments are provided using the State’s current pay matrix, the amounts must be in 2.5% increments. In FY2008 and 2009, market adjustments have predominantly been in the form of pay grade adjustments which resulted in 5% increases.

Will a timely performance review rating have any impact on employees receiving step increases on the new plans with steps?

Yes. The performance component of the new pay plans with steps will likely be very similar to step movement under the State’s current system, with the achievement of a set performance rating being required to receive a step increase. As indicated above, at the meetings and in the presentation, for all plans other than the Management Pay Plan, other criteria will influence an employee’s pay as well.

If the first Group is not fully implemented until FY2011, why did some employees receive a 5% increase in FY2009?

Part of the implementation plan is to provide market increases to classifications that are behind market in an effort to get those classifications at or as close to market before they move to the new pay plans. In FY2008 and 2009, certain classifications were provided market adjustments of 5%. The market position of these classifications was the primary criteria for receiving an adjustment, but certain classes identified as being significantly behind market did not receive market adjustments due to concerns regarding market data or equity internal equity issues that would arise as a result of the classification receiving an increase.

Is there a form with a schedule showing when my classification will receive a market adjustment?

There is no schedule for this information at this time. The decisions regarding which classifications will receive a market adjustment and when that will occur depends on the results of the latest salary surveys. The results of the surveys will be presented to the State Employee Pay Plan Oversight Committee which will then have input on which classifications are to receive a market adjustment.

When we begin on the new pay plans, will all employees start at the beginning of the new pay plans?

No. Employees will not all be moved to the entry level of the new pay plans. An employee’s position within the pay range of the new pay plans will depend on several factors. These factors include the employee’s relation relative to the market rate of the new pay range, the employee’s position within the pay range to which they are currently assigned, and any adjustments provided to the classification when it is implemented on the new pay plan.

Won’t these new pay plans be vulnerable to the “good ol’ boy” system or favoritism?

Based on input from employees themselves, the criteria for movement through the new pay plans will be as objective as possible and along with the improved level of communication and planning that will result from the new Performance Management Process, which will help to prevent abuse or favoritism. While no system is perfect and any system, if abused or used incorrectly, can result in inequities, the new system should be no more susceptible to favoritism or the “good ol’ boy” system than the State’s current system.

Do the new pay plans move employees to the unclassified service or in any way have an impact on employees’ civil service status?

No. The transition to the new pay plans will not in any way require employees to move to the unclassified service and will have no impact on employees’ civil service status.

Is the current step plan still frozen?

Yes. Employees may receive step increases as part of the market adjustments or other initiatives in preparation for transition to the new pay plans, but the State’s current system of step movement will not be reinitiated as a system.

Will there be COLA’s or general increases once the State moves to the new pay plans?

Yes. General increases will continue to be a part of employee compensation even after implementing the new pay plans. General increases are adjustments to an entire pay plan, and will be necessary in order to maintain the improved market position which will be achieved through market adjustments and implementing the new pay plans.

Some of the new plans show that there will be step increases provided every six months. Is this true?

Yes and no. The new pay plans that have steps as a component will all feature six month steps at the very beginning of the plan, but will then become nine month steps and eventually slow down to 12-month steps. This will allow employees to be moved from entry level to market (which is generally assumed to be the midpoint of a pay grade) faster than under the State’s current system.

Why do some of the new pay plans start at 85% of market?

All of the pay plans will provide for starting pay that is below the actual market value for the particular occupation. This is a common practice for virtually all employers as it reflects the fact that for the most part, new employees take some time to become fully proficient in their jobs, so they are not compensated for being fully proficient when they first begin employment.

Are longevity bonuses still a part of the new pay plans?

Longevity pay is set out in a separate statute than the one that authorizes the development and implementation of the new pay plans. Therefore, it is not a part of the new pay plans, but longevity pay was funded for FY2009 for eligible employees.

Will the movement to new plans impact current, agency specific practices regarding the advancement of employees, such as KDOT’s Equipment Operator Senior progression program?

Given the multiple agency practices currently in place, it cannot be said that the implementation of the new pay plans will have no effect on agency-specific practices. However, with respect to KDOT’s Equipment Operator Senior progression program, this program is an excellent illustration of the concept behind the movement through the new pay plans as employees progress through the profession based on the completion of objective criteria. This program will therefore translate almost perfectly into the new pay plans, so there should be little to no effect on that program specifically.

Implementation

How was it determined which classifications would be assigned to which Implementation Group?

There were multiple factors that went into the assignment of classifications to the Groups. The first factor was size, as the goal was to divide the State’s classified workforce into three Groups that were approximately the same size. Another of the primary concerns was to try to make sure that jobs that are occupationally related to one another were placed in the same Group so that they would be implemented on the new pay plans at the same time. To do otherwise could have led to perceptions of inequity where one group of employees may feel “left behind” another group of employees with whom they work closely. Cost was also an issue, as some of the classifications with the worst market position were placed in Group 3 in order to allow time to incrementally reduce their market deficiency before moving to the new pay plans.

Finally, ease of transition was also a consideration. Classifications assigned to the Basic Vocational Pay Plan were all placed in Group 1 partly because that plan is the most similar to the State’s current plan, so the transition would be less difficult or confusing. Conversely, those classifications assigned to the Management Pay Plan were all placed in Group 3 because it is the pay plan that is most different than what the State currently has, as well as to make sure that Management would not receive a potential benefit until the rest of the State workforce has been implemented.

Once performance begins to have an impact on pay, how will agency budgets be impacted to provide for pay based on performance?

Although it is assumed that there will be changes to the current processes and procedure regarding budgeting, there has been no definitive decision as to exactly how this will occur once the new pay plans are implemented. The Division of Personnel Services will be working closely with the Division of the Budget throughout the implementation process to assist in making any changes to the budgeting process to coincide with the new pay plans.

Will the classification review done as part of each Group’s first year activities help to bring unclassified jobs back to the classified service?

The classification review is being done to insure that positions are accurately classified before moving to the new pay plans. Given the increased flexibility of the new pay plans, agencies may decide to move some positions that were moved to the unclassified service in order to provide greater pay flexibility back to the classified service, but there is no specific intent or directive to do so as a result of these reviews.

If I am in a classification that has no numbers in the “market position” column, what does that mean?

Only 232 classifications were used as benchmarks in the Hay Group’s survey, so many classifications will not have a market position. Classifications that were used as benchmarks are listed in bold font on the lists of classifications appearing on the following link: http://www.da.ks.gov/newpayplans/classassignments.htm If the classification is bolded and there are no numbers in the “market position” column, that means that while the classification was utilized as a benchmark, there was insufficient data provided by the survey participants to determine a market position.

What happens to employees in classifications that have not yet been surveyed?

Many of the classifications that do not have an identified market position are part of a classification series where at least one level does have a market position. When a classification that is part of a classification series is scheduled to receive a market adjustment, all of the classifications within the classification series will receive the market adjustment. For those classifications that do not have a market position and are not part of a classification series with a level that does have a market position, data will be obtained through the salary surveys conducted by the Division of Personnel Services as part of the first year activities of each Group.

Is there any possibility that an employee will lose pay if they are moved to a different classification as a result of the classification review?

No employee will have their rate of pay reduced as a result of the classification review or the implementation of the new pay plans. It is possible that an employee may be moved to a classification with a lower pay grade, but the employee’s actual rate of pay will be preserved.

How can employees have input with respect to the survey process?

Each year, the Division of Personnel Services will contact agency HR offices to ask for input on employers to include in the upcoming salary survey. Employees are encouraged to inform their agency’s HR office of any employers that they believe should be included in the salary surveys for the State of Kansas.

Is the funding locked in for five years? If not, will agencies be required to come up with the money to fund the plans if the Legislature does not?

The 2008 Legislature included a provision that provides for five years of funding for market adjustments starting in the bill that authorizes the adoption of the new pay plans and performance management process. This multi-year funding commitment is the first of its kind for State employee compensation and we believe it demonstrates the strong commitment of the Legislature to this project. There is a clear understanding that this new plan will not work without, as the Hay Group put it, “a healthy dose of funding” and we are confident that the Administration and the Legislature will work together to continue to make funding of this initiative a priority.