Meeting was called to order by John Varner.   

I.  Introductory Comments 

Mr. Varner thanked everyone for attending this meeting.  He emphasized his main goals as Chair of the Staff Council are:

$                   Improving Staff Salaries

$                   Improving Staff Benefits and

$                   Strengthen the council as an institution.

 One of the means he hopes to accomplish these goals is by improving communication, and among the mechanisms to be used are the web page, the newsletter, the listserv, and by getting representatives and staff members to attend council meetings. 

             John encouraged the Staff representatives to communicate with the people in their departments, and for staff members to get involved in the council.

II. Director of Classification and Compensation - Mr. Chuck Gerard

Introduction was made.  Mr. Gerards presented an update on the Classification and Compensation Study.  Mr. Gerards stated the current system of classification and compensation was not working.  With 3,500 different job descriptions on file, it does not accurately represent the individual’s responsibilities and positions.  He indicated this overall effect the job evaluations and performance rating.  It also affects the pay structures.

Mr. Gerards gave a history of the study.   He stated Request for Proposals were sent out with 30-35 responses from different companies received.  After committees reviewed the proposals, Hewitt Associates, from Atlanta, were chosen.  Mr. Gerards stressed:

Athe purpose for this project was to define and implement a clear and consistent employment value proposition, through the develop of fair and equitable job descriptions, rewards programs, and performance management processes.@

Mr. Gerards emphasized the Areward programs@ is very important for employees because it includes; time off, good working conditions, good benefits and not just salaries.

Mr. Gerards spoke on the Project Deliverables which includes the Job Classification, Compensation and Performance Management.  He stated the University of Georgia had incorporated this process also but only dealt with the Job Classification portion of the process.

Job Classifications emphasized:

Job analysis, descriptions and families.

Mr. Gerards stated the emphasis is to place similar positions together and create job families.  He indicated that not all positions on campus would be able to be classified into families and this would not eliminate positions. 

Compensations emphasized:

Compensation philosophy, job evaluation, pay structures,
clear compensation process and performance-based pay.

Mr. Gerards stated the emphasis on compensation was to define the compensation policy, work for pay for performance and define pay structures per appropriate markets.   Mr. Gerards stated that we needed to remember that the pay structure is based on the available funding to the University.

Performance Management emphasized:

Performance management philosophy, performance planning
                        process, performance appraisal process and consistent
                        performance reviews.

Mr. Gerards felt we could expand in this area and encourage an improvement in the process through communication and education.

Mr. Gerards indicated that in January 2004 there were individuals from across the campus randomly selected to participate in  focus groups.  140 employees and 14 executives participated and were interviewed.  These individuals were allowed to discuss all aspects of issues in their areas and across campus.  In January 2004 a website was launched and encouraged all employees to review this site and ask questions online if needed.  The website is www.auburn.edu/administration/human_resources/compensation/ccp .  From the information gathered from the focus groups, job evaluation factors were identified and questionnaires were designed and sent out.  The focus groups identified what was working on campus and what/where improvements needed to be made.

Mr. Gerards indicated in the next step on the study involved:

Complete job questionnaires

Develop performance management system

Define job families

Develop job descriptions and

Develop a pay structure

Mr. Gerard emphasized that this program will provide a different type of performance management system. One goal is to improve the Supervisor=s knowledge of the appraisal system.  Mr. Gerards stressed again, the pay evaluations are always going to be based on the monetary availability the University has.

Mr. Gerards took questions from the audience.  Some of the concerns from the audience were:

Supervisor’s knowledge of the evaluation process;

If the same rules and regulations would still be in effect;

Whether the signature of an employee on their evaluation was      
             required;

How a one of a kind job description would be handled;

If a step program would be used; and

Request to have merit raises evaluated.