How does this apply to faculty? There is no indication of whether this covers full-time faculty or not. If it does, the one-time payment language needs changing, as does the sections on increases within rank. It would be important to clarify this.

For example, if an adjunct faculty member takes on a task outside of teaching, how does that factor in? How about FT faculty who take on program leadership outside of the job description?

It would be good to clarify for everyone in a follow-up if this is for faculty too. Thanks!

6. Red-Circle Rate Adjustments (a., b., c.)

Regarding Red-Circle Adjustments, what is the reason for employees receiving a lump sum rather than a base increase?

Why would long-serving employees who have worked at SLCC for most of their careers be given a lump sum rather than an increase on their base salaries? Do they have less value to the college than other employees? If this policy and procedure is approved, social security benefits for these long-serving employees will be reduced because Social Security benefits are determined by the 35 highest-income years. If SLCC’s longest-serving employees are given a lump sum, rather than base salary increases, their base salary won’t increase, which will be detrimental to their social security benefits.

Is this how SLCC values its employees? Its long-serving employees? What message does it send to all employees?

1. With the implementation of CBIZ and new employees being hired at higher rates than ever before and upgrades continuing for current employees, have the maximum salary grade ranges been increased? The employees that are in the red-circle adjustment category have not had compression addressed.
2. Who in PWC would review the salary increases? What does that review involve? What are the criteria for the review?
3. The statement that the President will receive a report, and they or their designee will determine the appropriate salary, is confusing. Would it be less than what other college employees would be receiving (including COLA)? Is their work valued less than other college employees? What is included in the report to the President – names, years of service, salaries? What knowledge does the President, or their designee have regarding the work of these individual employees? The proposed process also completely leaves out the supervisor who has knowledge of that work.

Clearly this proposed section of the policy/procedure does not match the first sentence of the Procedures (A.1.): Salt Lake Community College (“SLCC”) maintains a compensation philosophy to attract, retain, and motivate highly qualified and engaged employees.

The proposed Red-Circle Adjustment for a lump sum rather than a base increase is also in direct conflict with statements of appreciation and employee value issued by the college, as noted in the following examples.

On behalf of Executive Cabinet, thank you for all you do for our students, our community and each other. I am always proud to be part of SLCC, but I am especially proud to be part of an organization that prioritizes its people, investing significantly in retaining our incredible faculty and staff. (Chris Martin, CBIZ Compensation Study Update 3/12/24)

In support of one another and our shared commitment to be our very best selves. (Chris Martin memo, Focus and Learn Days 8/5/2024)

From Supervisors' Guidance Meetings—

Leadership is not about a title or designation, it’s about impact, influence and inspiration. (2025 Leadership Effectiveness Focus)

“. . . people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.” (April 2025)

Thank you each for your commitment to SLCC, our employees and our values. (Supervisor Guidance related to Interview Questions and Job Descriptions 3/11/24)

The Social Science of Leadership: (3) Listening – Actively listening to understand perspectives and demonstrate care for team members. (March 2025)

Is this proposed policy/procedure how SLCC values it’s long-serving employees? Is this proposed policy a commitment by the executive leadership “to be our very best selves” by treating long-serving employees with this type of disregard? Can the executive cabinet leadership in good conscious approve this procedure knowing it will negatively affect the social security retirement benefits and livelihood of its dedicated long-serving employees?

1. Policy Statement-General Comments

A. The Salary Administration process at SLCC lacks standardization and transparency. This policy and PWC’s website should contain a link to the salary schedules that PWC uses to calculate employee’s salaries. The Committee knows that PWC Compensation has these salary schedules and the process PWC uses to set salaries is misunderstood and sometimes seems arbitrary which undermines trust in the college’s compensation system. An example of this is the $65,000 salary proposed for the IBP request when ample evidence showed that the market rate in the USHE system for this position was between $80,000 and $85,000. Another example of is that some collateral duties or committee work are compensated while other receive no compensation. Likewise, sometimes this collateral duty compensation is below market value and there seem to be an arbitrary determination by PWC on the rate of compensation.

B. The college has only accomplished one of three goals under the CBIZ study. While employees whose salaries were below market level have been upgraded to market level, two issues remain which are not addressed by this policy:

1. Compression of salaries: In certain job titles, some one who has been in a position for a considerable period, is receiving the same pay as a new employee. There does not seem to be a premium placed on experience as far as the salaries or compensation is concerned.
2. Lack of Equity-Among departments there is extensive disparity in the starting salary for faculty with similar degrees and professional experience. For example, a new faculty member with a Ph.D. and 2 years

Employees who have been at the college for a long time are unhappy that the compression issue has not been addressed and they are make the same amount of money as new employees.

Can some of the 10% savings that is required by recent Utah law be used to address compression of salaries and lack of equity?

C. In the existing policy, section IV.B.5.b has been eliminated. This section, which addresses career ladder promotion, should be put back in the policy or explained more broadly to the campus community that we are no longer offering career laddering. While PWC has said they are working on career ladders within job titles, their statements seem to contradict their action of removing this section from the policy. There should be an emphasis in the policy to provide career ladders for employees dedicated to the college with plans to work here for a very long time. The removal of this section is discouraging may undermine employee morale, and result in increased turnover of the skilled employees who are critical to the college’s effective operation.

D. Consider revising the policy statement so it is more robust. It is one sentence.

E. There seems to be a practice of upgrading staff or position classifications in student affairs and people and workplace culture in recent months. Allowing these upgrades at a time when faculty and academic staff are in danger of being laid off seems to be providing a mixed message and is undermining employee morale.

F. While many employees are attracted to SLCC because of the work environment, a number of employees leave the college due to salary or compensation. Rather than relying upon anecdotal data, there should be an exit interview requirement so that this type of data can be collected as well as additional information that can improve the college’s operation.

G. There is a lack of clarity whether this policy applies to faculty as well as staff and just full time or part time/adjuncts. This should be clarified.
2. References
No comments.

3. Definitions

A. Most employees don’t understand what Exempt and Nonexempt Employee are. These definitions should be embedded into this policy from the Personnel Definitions document.
B. Sections 4.B.2, 4.C.6, 4.E, which address Learner Rate, Red Circle Rate Adjustments, and Pay Additive, respectively, should have definitions for each of these terms.
C. Section 4.C.4 addressing lateral transfer should have a definition.
D. The Personnel Definitions document defines “demotion,” and this definition should be embedded into the policy.

4. Procedures

A. Section 4.B-Starting Rate

1. Section 4.B.1 states that PWC must approve a salary request above the set range. It seems like it is difficult to get PWC to approve a salary set above the set range. In some cases, the program/department wanting to do the hiring may be more knowledgeable of the prevailing market rate than PWC. How is PWC determining what the appropriate starting rate should be? How is this shared broadly for understanding?
2. Section 4.B.1.a(1) seems to apply to only current staff employees. Why doesn’t this apply to new employees or faculty?
3. Section 4.B.2.b addresses “Learner Rate.” What is the timeline for an employee to be subject to the learner rate? The policy states “after the probationary period,” which is typically six months. Is it 6 months? How does this work for faculty who don’t have a probationary period?

B. Section 4.C-Salary Adjustment

1. Section 4.C.2 addresses one time pay adjustments. What does this section mean? What is the appropriate approval process?
2. This section does not address “Rank Advancement” for faculty. While section 4.C.3.a(1) references rank advancement, it does not provide what the pay scale is for rank advancement. This should be linked into the policy. This approach should also be used for all the other types of salary adjustments dealt with this section.
3. Section 4.C.5-Demotion Adjustment-At the current time, under the Employee Grievance policy there is the right to a grievance hearing when one is demoted. In that policy review, there has been some discussion to remove the right to a grievance hearing when one is demoted. Be mindful that Section 4.C.5 states: “a salary decrease may be made when a staff member is demoted.” Given this language, a demotion results in depriving an employee of a property right (compensation) and PWC may want to consider not taking away the right to a grievance hearing in the case of an employee demotion.
4. Section 4.C.6 addresses Red Circle Rate Adjustment; the committee has some skepticism whether a report is given to the President with the persons receiving this above grade salary and the salary increase being approved. Is this being done? If so, who is doing it?
5. Section 4.C.7.b (3) addresses equitable pay adjustment. The statement “recognition that a current salary is below that of other employees in the same grade or rank with similar experience and performance” does not make sense and should be reworded. In addition, what is the procedure for determining an equitable pay adjustment. That should be specified.
6. Section 4.C.8 Addresses Acting and Interim Assignments. It should be revised to provide pay for all acting appointments when there is currently no permanent person in that position. If are providing compensation for actings going longer than 60 days retroactively it is more equitable to just provide compensation of some kind to all acting.
7. Section 4.C.8.b(2)’s first sentence should be reworded to state: “Any acting appointment must not exceed 60 days. The committee maintains that there is substantial non-compliance with this provision and that employees are being designated to serve in acting positions longer than 60 days to avoid providing additional compensation to interim appointees.
8. Section 4.C.8.b (2)’s second sentence is unnecessary if all persons in an acting position are compensated. Also, the clause “a temporary salary adjustment will be applied retroactively to the first day of service” is not clear. The word “acting” should be added between “of” and “service.”
9. Section 4.C.8.c addresses interim appointment adjustments. The interim assignments procedure guide dated September 2022 should be linked to this section.

C. Section 4.E-Pay Additives

1. What are pay additives? What is the difference between a pay additive and a “One Time Pay Adjustment” set forth in section 4.C.2?
2. Section 4.E.3.b addresses pay differential, it states “PWC shall establish differential rates.” What are the factors which allow differential rates and how much are the rate differences.? For example, does a custodian who works a night shift make a greater hourly rate than a custodian working a day shift.?

D. Section 4.F-One Time Payment

1. Section 4.F.1-There may be some abuse of this provision by supervisors which results in overly creative budgeting. In addition, the bigger problem is that many employees are being routinely required to conduct work outside of their job description and not being compensated for it. Either job descriptions need to be revised, or position upgrades are necessary. There is not a clear line when an additional assignment justifies the need for additional compensation and when it does not. This needs to be clarified.
2. Section 4.F.2-the Faculty Association President and Staff Association president, are exempt employees who are paid salary and an additional stipend. This section needs to be revised to carve out exceptions for both Presidents and other positions that may be impacted by this. If we are making exceptions to allow individuals in these roles who are non-exempt, we need to make that clear in this policy.

E. Section 4.H-Exceptions

1. Section 4.H.1 violates Policy Development Policy section 4.J, which sets forth the process for the President to “Create Exceptions to Policy Requirements.” Section 4.H.1 should be revised to be compliant with the Policy Development policy section 4.J.