Salary Grade & Job Pricing

shansan

We have established Pay Grades for all our job titles and will post them for all employees to see - in MY OFFICE (oh so happy about that). Some employees are currently paid BELOW the set "Minimum" of the grade.
I have issues with establishing a minimum of a salary grade if it is not going to be adhered to. The debate with Exec Mgmt is that this is only a tool and not set in stone. The pay grades are followed by this statement: "The ranges are merely guidelines ... Actual pay for employees is determined at the sole discretion of Management and can be modified at any time."
Now, I am a fan of gray areas but I have a bigger concern with morale and being killed in the rampage.
Please supply me with feedback, documentation or legal notes to back my stance prior to all hell breaking loose in this organization!

hhaynal

If you have salary grades that are linked to correlating positions, adhere to them. I haven't researched anything on this issue, but just thinking down the road with a DOL/EEOC charge. Defense would be rather weak, defending that company has salary grades, but doesn't really follow them and leaves ultimate pay up to management. That might work if salary was to exceed pay grade, but less.......????? Really think you could have a problem here.

shansan

Thank you for solidifying my concerns. The VP Team supports me but the CEO is the one disagreeing. His response basically said there are only a few people under the minimum and we have good reasoning for that. He continues to believe my concerns are "exaggerated and silly."

LivindonSouth

You're in a pickle! It's a bad enough situation to have people paid below the start step of a position, but posting the grades and steps only makes it glaringly apparent and targets, who else, the person in HR. You will be called on, ethically, to support management in its decision to bastardize the pay grades.

Having fought this to some degree at several places, I never did understand the 'get em as cheap as you can' mentality. The terrible outcome is then that person becomes productive and is below grade and next time you hire in that grade you have the problem of repeating the mistake or paying the new guy more than the experienced one.

The story that 'this is a guide only' is about as lame as they come and will be viewed as such by anyone under grade.



"Life is a tragedy when seen in close-up, but a comedy in long-shot."
Charlie Chaplin

Dasher

I am with Don on this one. If you have salary grade ranges they should be adhered to. No one should have an hourly rate below the minimum, and those who make more than the maximum rate, must be red circled. Or just don't have a chart at all, since you are not using it.

Gillian3

Unfortunately, I don't think that there are documentation or legal notes to help you out. It is just common sense, apparently a bit lacking in Executive Management, that you shouldn't do this. There aren't any laws restricting stupidity.

atrimble

When we revise our pay scales, we increase ("bi-annually adjust") the pay, at least up to the new minimum, of anyone that is currently earning below that rate. If it's someone with years of experience, then we may give them a proportional increase beyond the minimum also, so that if we hire a new person at the minimum, Ol' Joe's not making the same as the new guy.

If you POST or PUBLISH or otherwise distribute an intent of management, I'd think NLRB would expect management to abide by it (even with a disclaimer). Not paying employees the minimum for their position could become an age/race/gender issue, depending on the demographics of the majority of "underpaid" employees. If it's "only a tool," it should never had been made "public."

shansan

Thank you all for your feedback. Although the CEO still disagrees with me he has agreed to meet me halfway with adjusting some minimums as well as increasing a few employee's rates. I do not feel that this is a 100% satisfaction it eases some of my major concerns. Again, thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts.