SALARY EQUITY STUDY UPDATE
by Patrice Arseneault, IFO Equity Advocate
 

The joint MnSCU/IFO Salary Review Committee met several times last spring and four times this summer in order to work on recommendations and adjustments for the salary analysis and annual reviews required by our collective bargaining agreement in Article 11, Section I.

4-Year Analyses Completed

In spring 2003, analyses of all [non-adjunct] faculty salaries for FY1997 and FY2002 were completed. Between March 31 and April 4, the salary review consultants from the Hay Group, Tom McMullen and Malcolm Dow, visited each campus in order to present the results of the study and to answer your questions about the analyses. If you were not able to attend, you may view their power point presentation and the detailed analytical report for each campus on the IFO website http://www.ifo.org/Salary/SalaryReviewHome.htm.

RESULTS

Negative Differences in Pay in FY2002 By Protected Class Status

The statistical analysis of the faculty FY 2002 salary data used the Multiple Regression model to predict salaries for each campus based on a number of factors known to affect pay. Variables coding for gender and minority status were included in the analysis. With the exception of the Southwest campus, the analyses indicate that any negative differences between the White male reference category and the various protected categories were not statistically significant (for FY 2002). On the Southwest campus in FY 2002, the regression analyses indicate that White female faculty earn on average a statistically significant $1,791 less than similarly situated White male faculty. MnSCU advised the Salary Review Committee that they anticipate providing legally permissible, gender specific adjustments at Southwest in order to address the negative salary differential for female faculty. MnSCU will advise the IFO once they identify female faculty at Southwest who would receive a salary adjustment.

Individuals with Negative Differences in Pay in FY2002

For FY2002, the consultants also performed a separate statistical analysis of the faculty salary data for each campus and system-wide, using the Multiple Regression analysis model to predict salaries based on a number of factors known to affect pay. In the study, the predicted average salary for faculty as compared to faculty with similar data is given by the standard residual. Faculty with a negative standard residual had a salary lower than what is predicted for a similarly situated faculty member (with the same rank, years in rank, same high degree, program, years of employment experience, etc.). The Hay Group determined the number of faculty whose salaries were more than one standard residual below the predicted average salary for similarly situated faculty, and also the number of faculty whose salaries are more than 1.5 standard residuals below the predicted salary and those more than 2 standard residuals below the predicted salary.

In the system-wide analysis of FY2002 data, the consultants identified 278 faculty across all campuses whose salaries are lower than the predicted average salary for similarly situated faculty by more than one standardized residual. In the campus analyses, the consultants identified 74 faculty at St. Cloud, 68 faculty at Mankato, 40 faculty at Moorhead, 39 faculty at Winona, 21 faculty at Bemidji, 17 faculty at Southwest and 6 faculty at Metropolitan whose salaries are lower than the predicted average salary for similarly situated faculty by more than one standardized residual.

Results Sent to Faculty

Early this summer, each non-adjunct faculty member who was employed during the academic year of the analysis, 2001-02, was sent an “IFO SALARY REVIEW DATA SHEET FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2001-2002.” The data sheet contained your data that was used by the consultants in their analyses (e.g., department/program, employment status [probationary, tenured, fixed term], highest degree, years in rank, years of prior creditable employment experience). In addition, the data sheet provided your campus standard residual and system wide standard residual. Due to the small population size at Southwest and Metropolitan, the consultants also utilized a hybrid statistical model to determine a third standardized residual for faculty at those two campuses.

Corrections for Data Sheet Errors

We asked individuals to advise us by email if there is an error on your data sheet. We have been correcting our database and rerunning the standardized residual for faculty who had errors in their data. On or shortly after September 22, we will be sending to your campus address the first group of revised results to faculty who notified us by August 22 of errors in their data. For faculty who notified us of data errors after August 22, we will be correcting our database and sending you revised residuals in October.

STATUS FY02 ANALYSIS

During our several meetings this summer, the joint Salary Review Committee reviewed the results of the salary analyses conducted by the Hay Group, to determine recommendations for salary adjustments. The committee has not yet reached agreement on adjustments for faculty who were identified in FY2002 as having a low actual salary as compared to the predicted salary, but we are scheduled to meet again in September and October.

STATUS ANNUAL REVIEWS

The committee has completed the “annual reviews” of salaries for faculty who were newly hired or received terminal degrees in FY1997 through FY2001, to determine whether faculty were appropriately placed on the then current equity grid. The committee is working on the details of the implementation of the remedy for newly hired faculty or those with new terminal degrees who were found to be below the appropriate placement on the salary grid during each of the years in the annual review FY 1997 through FY 2001. We hope to reach agreement this fall on adjustments for faculty identified as having a low salary in the annual reviews.