Tag: pay

Federal Agencies Issue Proposed Rule on Pay Equity and Transparency for Federal Contractors – CUPA-HR
by CUPA-HR | February 14, 2024

On January 30, the Department of Defense, General Services Administration, and NASA issued a proposed rule to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to create a salary history ban and require pay transparency during the hiring process for federal contractors and subcontractors. The proposed rule aligns with the Biden administration’s 2022 Executive Order, “Advancing Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness in Federal Contracting by Promoting Pay Equity and Transparency.”

According to the proposed rule, the FAR would be amended to implement a government-wide policy that would:

prohibit contractors and subcontractors from seeking and considering job applicants’ previous compensation when making employment decisions about personnel working on or in connection with a government contract (“salary history ban”); and

require these contractors and subcontractors to disclose on job announcements the compensation to be offered (“compensation disclosure” or “pay transparency”).

The proposed rule comes as many states and localities have recently implemented salary history bans and pay transparency laws. As the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking notes, 21 states, 22 localities, and Washington, D.C., have put bans into place that prohibit employers from asking job applicants for their salary, and 10 states have pay transparency laws in place, with several other states working toward implementing such laws.

The agencies have provided a 70-day comment period for the proposed rule, closing on April 1. Stakeholders are invited to submit comments on their support for or opposition to the provisions of the proposed rule. CUPA-HR will monitor for additional updates on this proposed rule and other policy initiatives at the federal level as they relate to pay transparency and salary history bans.

Share This Article:
Source link
February 14, 2024
Newly Updated CUPA-HR Data Shed Light on Trends in Representation and Pay Equity in the Higher Ed Workforce – CUPA-HR

by Julie Burrell | January 22, 2024

Progress in both representation and equitable pay for women and people of color remained sluggish in most roles on college and university campuses in academic year 2022-23, according to the newest data. Through several interactive graphics representing years of research, CUPA-HR highlights the progress that has been made and the disparities that persist. The data track gender and racial composition as well as pay of administrative, faculty, professional, and staff roles, collected from CUPA-HR’s signature surveys.

While the representation of women and people of color across all roles has steadily increased, inequity remains, especially when it comes to compensation for women and people of color. However, there were some notable areas of progress when it comes to compensation. Asian women and men of color (except for Native American/Alaskan Native men) in administrative roles saw better pay equity than most other groups.

Administrators

The share of racial and ethnic minorities in administrative roles continued to grow over the past decade, but gaps in both representation and pay remained steady. This is especially true for women of color, who represented less than 11% of these roles and, for the most part, received lower salaries than White men.

In 2022-23, people of color made up 18.7% of administrators, up from 12.9% in 2011-12. Although the proportion of people of color in higher ed administrator positions grew steadily over the last decade, these increases have not kept pace with the rate at which minorities are obtaining graduate degrees.

No improvement was shown in pay disparities for most women administrators. All female administrators except for Asian women received lower salaries than White men. Conversely, men of color, except for Native American/Alaskan Native men, were paid salaries greater than those of White men.

The Administrators in Higher Education Survey collects data on administrator positions that manage a higher ed institution or a division within it.

See the Administrators Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics, as well as data broken out by CEO, provost and chief HR officer.

Faculty

There are two notable findings regarding faculty composition. First, more women faculty were represented in non-tenure-track roles than in tenure-track roles in 2022-23. Second, with each increase in rank, the proportions of women faculty and faculty of color decreased for both tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty. Taken together, this means that women were over-represented in the lowest-paying and lowest-ranking positions.

Pay gaps within rank persist, particularly for women faculty at the professor level, regardless of tenure status. These gaps are most notable for female professors of color in non-tenure-track positions. Pay gaps for assistant and associate professors have narrowed over time, particularly for tenure-track faculty.

The factor that most impacts faculty pay is promotion to a higher rank, which is often the only time faculty receive significant increases in salary. When there is bias in promoting women and faculty of color to successive ranks, as our data continued to show, this results in career earnings gaps that far exceed what is often detected in pay equity studies within rank for a given year.

The Faculty in Higher Education Survey collects data on tenure-track faculty positions and non-tenure-track teaching faculty positions.

See the Faculty Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

Professionals

In academic year 2022-23, women of all races and ethnicities were paid less than their male counterparts in professional roles, while women’s representation increased from 58% to 61% across all professional positions since 2016-17. The growth is due to slight increases in the representation of women of color, from 13.1% in 2016-17 to 15.7% in 2022-23.

Representation by gender and race/ethnicity varied widely by position. Human resources had the greatest share of women professionals, with 82% being women, including 28% women of color. Information technology had the lowest percentage of professional women (27%), and librarians and development/fundraising professionals had the lowest representation of professionals of color (14%).

While pay was more equitable for most groups (apart from Hispanic/Latina women and men of two or more races), pay disparities persisted. Women of all races and ethnicities were paid less than their male counterparts. In addition, Hispanic/Latino men, Native Hawaiian men, and men of two or more races were paid less than White men.

The Professionals in Higher Education Survey collects data on positions in specific functional areas in higher ed institutions, such as academic or student services, that usually require a baccalaureate degree.

See the Professionals Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

Staff

Staff roles continued to have a higher representation of people of color than any other higher ed employee group last year. Staff also continued to be the lowest-paying positions in higher ed, with women particularly hard hit by pay disparities.

In 2022-23, women of color represented about 19% of all higher ed staff, and men of color represent about 13% of all higher ed staff — a modest increase since 2016-17. Skilled craft employees were the least racially diverse, a finding that has persisted across the past six years. Notably, skilled craft staff are among the highest-paid staff positions.

Since 2016-17, women were paid consistently and considerably less than White men. Pay equity for American Indian/Alaska Native women, Asian women, and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander women was better in 2022-23 than in 2016-17. Pay equity was the same or worse in 2022-23 than in 2016-17 for Black women, Hispanic/Latina women, women of two or more races, and White women. Men of color fared considerably better than women of color when it came to pay equity.

The Staff in Higher Education Survey collects data on positions that are generally non-exempt and do not require a college degree.

See the Staff Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

CUPA-HR Research

CUPA-HR is the recognized authority on compensation surveys for higher education, with its workforce surveys designed by higher ed HR professionals for higher ed HR professionals and other campus leaders.

Share This Article:

Source link

January 22, 2024
Pay Equity Still Lags for Women Administrators – CUPA-HR
by Julie Burrell | November 29, 2023

An analysis of two decades worth of CUPA-HR data on gender and pay in higher ed administrative roles paints a troubling picture of pay equity. In 2022, women made up 51% of administrators in college and universities, but they were paid 93 cents for each dollar a man in an administrator position was paid. This represents an increase of just 3 cents from 2002, when women made 90 cents for each dollar a man was paid.

Among chief human resources officers, the pay disparity is even wider. Though three in four (76%) of CHROs are women, their pay in 2022 was only 89 cents for each dollar male CHROs were paid. Deputy CHROs who are women were paid only 83 cents, a figure that remained unchanged from 2002 through 2022.

The Higher Ed Administrators: Trends in Diversity and Pay Equity From 2002 to 2022 report also found that people of color — women especially — are increasingly represented in administrative positions. Drawing on 10 years of data, CUPA-HR found that between 2012 and 2022, the representation of people of color in higher ed administration increased by 41%. In 2012, people of color comprised 13% of administrators and in 2022, 18% of administrators. Women of color went from comprising 7% of higher ed administrators in 2012 to 10% of higher ed administrators in 2022.

Despite these gains in representation, women of most races and ethnicities are still paid less than White men in the same administrator positions.

The Report’s Major Findings Include:

The past 20 years saw an increase of 20% of women in administration, from 43% in 2022 to 51% in 2022, but pay equity for women has not kept pace. In 2002, women in administrator positions were paid 90 cents for each dollar men in administrator positions were paid. Two decades later, women in administrator positions were paid just 93 cents for each dollar men in administrator positions are. These wage gaps are not explained by the fact that women may have greater representation in lower-paying positions.

From 2012-2022, the representation of people of color in administrative roles increased by 41%. The biggest increases were among administrators of two or more races (290% increase) and Asian administrators (76%). Women of color have seen more than double the percentage increase in representation than men of color (54% increase for women versus 26% for men).

But people of color are still underrepresented in administrative positions. Using the percentage of people of color with U.S. graduate degrees (31%) as a comparison, we find that only 18% of higher ed administrators were people of color in 2022.

Women’s representation in executive roles increased, but pay inequity still exists. In 2022, women held one in three campus presidencies, an increase of 60% from 2002. In 2002, female presidents were paid 92 cents on the dollar to male presidents and saw only a 1-cent increase in the 20 years since. The worst pay equity for presidents was for Hispanic or Latina women, who were paid 82 cents per dollar paid to White men. In the same time span, the representation of women provosts increased, comprising nearly half (48%) of provosts in 2022. The gender pay gap narrowed as well: Female provosts were paid 91 cents on the dollar compared to male provosts in 2002, and in 2022, female provosts were paid 96 cents on the dollar compared to male provosts.

CHRO gender pay equity remains low. In 2022, three in four (76%) CHROs were women, with White women representing 60%. In 2002, female CHROs were paid 86 cents for each dollar male CHROs were paid. In 2022, female CHROs were paid only 89 cents for each dollar male CHROs were paid.

Addressing the Administrative Pay Gap

Addressing pay inequity and increasing the representation of people of color among higher ed administrators requires long-term solutions like conducting pay analyses. CUPA-HR’s DataOnDemand for the Administrators in Higher Education Survey features the most comprehensive data available on higher ed administrator salaries, as well as data on pay equity and representation for women and people of color for every administrative position.

Recruiting a more diverse pool of faculty candidates and mitigating bias in faculty promotions are also important to succession planning, as one notable path to the presidency is to start off as a faculty member, ascend to dean, then to provost, and then to president.

You also might consider what talent pipeline programs exist on your campus. For inspiration, see these models of internal talent development:

Share This Article:
Source link
November 29, 2023
Pay Increases for Higher Ed Employees Sharply Improve, But Still Fall Short of Inflation Rate – CUPA-HR
by CUPA-HR | April 3, 2023

New research from CUPA-HR has found that although employees across the higher education workforce saw the most substantial pay raises in 2022-23 than in the past several years, they are still being paid less than they were in 2019-20 in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Some of the key findings from an analysis of CUPA-HR’s higher ed workforce salary survey data from 2016 to 2023:

This academic year, raises for higher ed employees were the largest seen in the past seven years, and all position types (administrators, professionals, staff and faculty) received an increase of at least 1.11 percentage points compared to the previous year.

Tenure-track and non-tenure-track teaching faculty continue to receive the smallest pay increases of any higher ed employee category. In 2022-23, tenure-track faculty saw a median pay increase of 2.9 percent and non-tenure-track faculty saw an increase of 3.2 percent. Tenure-track faculty salary increases have not kept pace with inflation since at least 2015, and non-tenure-track salary increases last met or exceeded inflation in 2016-17, meaning full-time faculty in general continue to be paid less every year in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Staff, which is typically the lowest-paid category of higher ed employees, saw the biggest raises this academic year at 5.3 percent (up from 2.9 percent in 2021-22).

Explore this data and more in CUPA-HR’s newest interactive graphic.

CUPA-HR Research

CUPA-HR is the recognized authority on compensation surveys for higher education, with its workforce surveys designed by higher ed HR professionals for higher ed HR professionals and other campus leaders. CUPA-HR has been collecting data on the higher ed workforce for more than 50 years, and we maintain one of the largest workforce databases in existence. CUPA-HR also publishes numerous research publications and interactive graphics highlighting trends and issues around higher ed workforce planning, pay equity, representation of women and racial/ethnic minorities and more. Learn more about CUPA-HR research.

Share This Article:
Source link
April 3, 2023
CUPA-HR Data Highlights Trends in Representation and Pay Equity in the Higher Education Workforce, and the News Is Mixed – CUPA-HR

by CUPA-HR | March 1, 2023

When it comes to representation and pay equity for women and people of color in the higher education workforce, colleges and universities have frequently struggled to make meaningful progress. Through several new interactive graphics representing years of research, CUPA-HR shines a light on the progress that has been made and the disparities that persist. These graphics represent data from CUPA-HR’s four signature higher ed workforce surveys — Administrators, Faculty, Professionals, and Staff — through 2022.

Administrators

While the proportion of people of color in higher ed administrator positions has grown steadily over the last 10 years, these increases have not kept pace with the rate at which minorities are obtaining graduate degrees. In 2022, people of color made up 18.2 percent of administrators, up from 12.9 percent in 2012.

The data also show that pay gaps for women administrators of all races/ethnicities are consistent across the past 10 years and notably wide. Pay inequity is particularly egregious for women administrators of color (with the exception of Asian women). Men of color, on the other hand, have been paid salaries equitable to or greater than those of White men in recent years.

The Administrators in Higher Education Survey collects data on administrator positions that manage a higher ed institution or a division within it.

See the Administrators Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics, as well as data broken out by CEO, provost and chief HR officer.

Faculty

There are two notable findings in faculty composition. First, more women are represented in non-tenure-track than in tenure-track faculty. Second, for each tenure status and with each increase in rank, the proportions of women and faculty of color decrease. This means that women are over-represented in the lowest-paying and lowest-ranking positions. This remains the case despite the fact that the proportion of women and faculty of color have increased slightly at each rank over the past five years.

Pay gaps for women faculty, regardless of tenure status or rank, continue to persist, particularly at the rank of professor. These gaps are most notable for women of color. Pay gaps at other ranks have narrowed over time, particularly for tenure-track faculty. Importantly, the factor that most impacts faculty pay is promotion to a higher rank. Often, the only significant increases in salary happen with these promotions. These data show that the only group that has greater representation with each increase in rank is that of White male faculty, and this pattern has persisted over time.

The Faculty in Higher Education Survey collects data on tenure-track faculty positions and non-tenure-track teaching faculty positions.

See the Faculty Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

Professionals

Women’s representation has increased across all professionals’ positions since 2017, and in 2022, women represented more than 60 percent of higher ed professionals. This change is due to slight increases in representation of women of color since 2017. In 2022, representation of people of color was 24 percent overall, with the highest percentage among human resources professionals (34 percent) and diversity and equal opportunity professionals (33 percent).

In 2022, women were consistently paid less than White men, a pattern that has worsened since 2017. However, men of color were paid more equitably in 2022 compared to previous years.

The Professionals in Higher Education Survey collects data on positions in specific functional areas in higher ed institutions, such as academic or student services, that usually require a baccalaureate degree.

See the Professionals Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

Staff

Staff employees have a higher representation of people of color than any other higher ed employee group. This is notable in that these are the lowest-paying positions in higher ed. In 2022, women of color represented about 19 percent of all higher ed staff, and men of color represented about 13 percent of all higher ed staff. These numbers have increased since 2017, though modestly. Skilled craft employees were the least racially diverse group, as 80 percent were White men, a finding that has persisted across the past six years. Notably, skilled craft staff are among the highest-paid staff positions.

Since 2017, women in staff positions have been paid consistently and considerably less than White men in staff positions, a pattern that has worsened over time, particularly for women in office and clerical positions. Men of color were paid more equitably in 2022 when compared to 2017.

The Staff in Higher Education Survey collects data on positions that are generally non-exempt and do not require a college degree.

See the Staff Composition and Pay Equity by Gender and Race/Ethnicity interactive graphics.

CUPA-HR Research

CUPA-HR is the recognized authority on compensation surveys for higher education, with its workforce surveys designed by higher ed HR professionals for higher ed HR professionals and other campus leaders. CUPA-HR has been collecting data on the higher ed workforce for more than 50 years, and we maintain one of the largest workforce databases in existence. CUPA-HR also publishes numerous research publications and interactive graphics highlighting trends and issues around higher ed workforce planning, pay equity, representation of women and racial/ethnic minorities and more. Learn more about CUPA-HR research.

Share This Article:

Source link

March 1, 2023
Supreme Court: Highly Compensated Employee Entitled to Overtime Because Employer Did Not Pay on a Salary Basis – CUPA-HR

by CUPA-HR | February 23, 2023

On February 22, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Helix Energy Solutions, Inc. v. Hewitt, finding that an employee making over $200,000 per year was entitled to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) because he was not paid on a salary basis. The case is a reminder that exempt status depends not only on how much the employee is paid, but also on how they are paid. Employers may want to be particularly careful when providing exempt employees — including part-time exempt employees — with different weekly pay based on hours worked.

Under U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulations, an employee must meet the following three requirements to be considered an executive, administrative or professional employee exempt from the FLSA’s overtime pay mandates: (1) perform duties consistent with those exempt categories as set forth by the DOL, (2) be paid a minimum salary (currently set at $684 per week), and (3) be paid on a salary basis. The employer in the case argued that the employee was exempt because he was paid $963 per day, therefore making at least the minimum salary of $684 per week, and he met the duties test for an executive.

The court found, however, that the employee was not paid on a salary basis as set forth in Section 541.602 of DOL regulations and was therefore not exempt. Section 541.602 requires exempt employees to receive the full pre-determined salary for any week in which they perform any work without regard to the number of days or hours worked. Specifically, the court said the employee “did not get a salary (of $963 or any other amount) because his weekly take-home pay could be as little as $963 or as much as $13,482, depending on how many days he worked.” The court did say, however, that daily-rate workers could qualify as paid on a salary basis if the pay met the conditions set out in DOL regulations §541.604(b).

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh contended that the salary threshold and salary basis test — both of which DOL created through regulations — may not be consistent with the FLSA itself. Specifically, Kavanaugh said:

“The Act focuses on whether the employee performs executive duties, not how much an employee is paid or how an employee is paid. So it is questionable whether the Department’s regulations — which look not only at an employee’s duties but also at how much an employee is paid and how an employee is paid — will survive if and when the regulations are challenged as inconsistent with the Act. It is especially dubious for the regulations to focus on how an employee is paid (for example, by salary, wage, commission, or bonus) to determine whether the employee is a bona fide executive. An executive employee’s duties (and perhaps his total compensation) may be relevant to assessing whether the employee is a bona fide executive. But I am hard pressed to understand why it would matter for assessing executive status whether an employee is paid by salary, wage, commission, bonus, or some combination thereof.”

Since the employer in this case failed to raise the challenge to the regulations properly, the issue was not considered before the court. As such, it remains unclear how many justices agree with Kavanaugh and whether the majority of the court would overturn the DOL’s salary basis and threshold tests.

CUPA-HR continues to monitor all updates relating to the FLSA and its implementing regulations and will keep members apprised of significant news with respect to the overtime issue.

Share This Article:

Source link

February 23, 2023
2022 Data: Changes in Higher Ed Pay and Workforce Size – CUPA-HR

by CUPA-HR | April 27, 2022

CUPA-HR has released its data on overall higher ed pay increases, as well as changes in workforce size for 2021-22.

Higher Ed Pay Increases Have Not Kept Pace With Inflation

The soaring inflation rate has far outpaced pay increases for the higher education workforce. According to findings from CUPA-HR’s annual workforce surveys for 2021-22, overall median salaries for administrators increased by 3.4%. Professionals and non-exempt staff saw increases of 2.9%, and salaries for tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty increased by 1.6% and 1.5%, respectively. The inflation rate for 2021 was 6.8% and continues to climb.

This is not the first year that pay increases have not kept up with inflation. Pay increases for administrators, professionals and staff last met or exceeded inflation in 2019-20. Non-tenure-track faculty salary increases last met or exceeded inflation in 2016-17, and tenure-track faculty salary increases have not kept pace with inflation in any of the past six years.

Explore pay-increase trends on CUPA-HR’s website.

Overall Workforce Size Has Declined in the Wake of the Pandemic

Historically, the overall size of the higher education workforce has increased from year to year. However, colleges and universities are experiencing the same employee recruitment and retention challenges that most U.S. employers have struggled with in the past few years. In both 2020-21 and 2021-22, the size of full-time staff, part-time staff, and tenure-track faculty declined from the prior year.

Two areas of the workforce that saw growth this year were those of non-tenure-track faculty and adjuncts. Although the number of non-tenure-track faculty and adjuncts declined between 2019-20 and 2020-21, those numbers have rebounded in 2021-22.

Explore the trends in workforce size changes on CUPA-HR’s website.

In-Depth Data and Custom Reports

Higher ed institutions can use CUPA-HR’s DataOnDemand (DOD) subscription service to run comprehensive data tables and analyses.

Share This Article:

Source link

April 27, 2022
New Research Shows Women in the Leadership Pipeline in Higher Education Have Better Representation and Pay in Institutions With Female Presidents and Provosts – CUPA-HR

by CUPA-HR | January 24, 2022

New research by CUPA-HR has found that U.S. colleges and universities with women presidents or provosts have higher representation of women in administrative, dean and faculty positions than institutions led by men. The study also found that colleges and universities with women presidents have higher pay for women in administrative positions than institutions led by men. These positions tend to be pipelines for the senior-most executive positions in higher ed, which underscores the significance of the findings.

Women Administrators Pay and Representation in Institutions With Female Presidents

Findings show that institutions with female presidents have a higher percentage of women in all administrative categories — senior institutional officers, institutional administrators and heads of divisions. Although female administrators are generally paid less than male administrators in the same positions regardless of the sex of the president, female senior institutional officers, institutional administrators, and heads of divisions are paid more equitably at institutions with a female president than at institutions with a male president.

Female Deans and Faculty Pay and Representation in Institutions With Female Provosts

Institutions with female provosts have a significantly higher representation of women in dean positions and in all faculty ranks. Provost sex does not have a strong or consistent impact on pay equity for deans and faculty; however, it is worth noting that better representation at higher faculty ranks and in dean positions has an impact on pay, as these positions make higher salaries.

The representation of women drops with successive faculty ranks (from assistant to associate to full professor). These promotions represent the few times in a faculty member’s career when appreciable salary increases are granted. If women are not being promoted, they are not receiving these pay raises. In addition, those in dean positions are generally promoted from senior faculty ranks. Therefore, if women are not adequately represented in senior faculty, they will not have the same likelihood as men of being considered for a higher-paying dean position.

To sum up the findings, higher ed institutions with female executives have better representation of women throughout their institutions in positions that: a) are paid higher salaries and b) serve as key points in the executive leadership pipeline. Jackie Bichsel, CUPA-HR’s director of research and co-author of the new report, noted that, “In an era where institutions are adapting to shifting workforce expectations, adjusting to continuous decreases in budgets, contemplating changes in enrollment, addressing challenges of recruitment and retention, and rethinking their mission, more openness to change and less tolerance of risk may be just what is needed to navigate this new landscape. Providing more (and more equitable) opportunities for women to advance within higher education seems an obvious path forward in this navigation.”

Read the full report, Women in the Leadership Pipeline in Higher Education Have Better Representation and Pay in Institutions With Female Presidents and Provosts.

Share This Article:

Source link

January 24, 2022