Questions from the USPS Senate Regarding the Outcome of the Classification Redesign Project

Questions from the USPS Senate regarding the outcome of the Classification Redesign Project with answers by Sandy Lovins, Associate Vice President, Division of Human Resources

May 8, 2007

Q. How many positions are in “classification limbo”?Is this due to (1) movement between pay plans, i.e., Staff (USPS) toAdministration (A&P) or Administration (A&P) to Staff (USPS); or (2) conflicts or disagreements over the job code chosen; or (3) lack of position information which precludes a match or choice of job code? How can we find out their status? What happened when the decision was not made by April 20th? Was the deadline changed for specific positions or was the whole process held back?

A.Response: No positions are being held in limbo any longer. There were approximately 87 that were held back after the initial rollout. These positions experienced a change in pay plans, and were held back for further review after some concerns were raised regarding the impact on bargaining unit status (shifting from in-unit eligible to out-of-unit positions). After the concerns were raised, the University chose to hold them back to carefully review the concerns. That review has now been completed, and the positions were released with an effective date of May 4th (the start of a new pay period) for the changes.

Q. When will people moving between pay plans be notified of the information sessions being provided by HR on the changes to their benefits, retirement and leave? The Senate prefers an “opt-out” notification so that the employee must decline assistance and information from HR.

A.All notifications have been sent. An individual letter to each person affected by the change was sent to their HRW liaison who, in turn, distributed the letters to appropriate managers/areas. Every employee whose pay plan changed received an individual notice from Sonya Techton, our HR Retirement Benefits specialist, inviting them (1) to attend a general informational session regarding changes in benefits options, and/or (2) to schedule an individual appointment with her, if they preferred to meet one-on-one. She sent follow up reminders (via e-mail) to each affected employee, reminding them of the sessions and encouraging them to attend or contact her directly.

Q. Some employees perceive they have been demoted because of the contraction of pay grades into wider pay bands. Several employees feel that they have worked for years to gain experience and attain a position of significance and now have been lumped into a pay band with less experienced staff and at a lower “pay grade” which they feel diminishes their credibility and authority. While the pay bands may allow for greater flexibility and wider ranges of pay, the perception of being placed in a pay band with people you supervise has been demoralizing to some. This may be one of the hardest perceived slights to overcome.

A. While no one has been demoted as a result of the project (again, jobs or work has not changed as a direct result of this study), we understand the perception. We’ve appreciated the feedback we’ve received as we’ve visited with various groups on the Tampa and regional campuses, and are looking at this issue closely. As has been stated from the onset, this was not a compensation study. Broadbanding is a way to cluster like jobs with similar levels of responsibility into groupings. We did not, however, change the status or pay of individual jobs. Again, this is under review and we will provide more information over the next month.

Q.Changes to titles for positions that are considered professional or technical (i.e., engineer, accountant, electrician) which may have, in fact, required a specific degree, may have larger ramifications than just the perceived emotional attachment to the name. For instance, Engineer Supervisor, Engineer, and Engineer Assistant were titles that no longer exist in the new classification system. It is possible that outside of the University, someone must show specific experience as an Engineer (which to some is a professional/technical title) in order to qualify. Without that title, it will be harder to establish work history if your new title is something else without “engineer” in the title or “X” specialist. The same may apply to accountants and others. To have studied for a degree in accounting and to have the passed the CPA exam, is not only an achievement, but a professional distinction that is lost if, by virtue of your job description, you are called “Fiscal & Business Analyst”. The title change may have consequences for other semi-professional or technical titles that might require or seek certification, licensure or accreditation as part of their job.

A.Our Classification team has been working with managers and supervisors to determine the most appropriate titling for positions. It was the intent to have job titles reflect the majority of duties being performed. We have been responsive to reviewing jobs where it has been reported to us that we “got it wrong” or where there was a more appropriate title that could be assigned. We’ve also been responsive to adding new and additional titles to appropriately capture the work done here at USF.

Q.There is concern over how to recognize and/or compensate staff with like duties and responsibilities who serve different sized populations. Should the classification be any different for an Office Manager who serves a very small office (4 total employees including supervisor) or a large department (40 total employees or more). Some staff feel that their work is harder than the smaller unit employee, not because they do different work, but because they are responsible for so many more employees. Should compensation and/or classification be tied to volume and/or experience and seniority?

A. USF is a very large and diverse organization. We have large departments, small departments, and everything in between. When analyzing jobs, we take a number of factors into consideration, including the size of the organization, nature of the work, complexity, direct impact on the overall organization, consequence of error, etc. While all aspects are taken into consideration with job analysis, considerable weight is given to “quality” (what is being done) vs. “quantity” (volume) when assigning job classifications.

Q.Since the title changes will not result immediately in any changes in job duties, how should the career path be determined when someone’s current job really doesn’t fit wholly in one job code? Say an Office Manager who also manages the department’s web pages? Should they work to remove that duty from their job so they more uniformly match the job code? Or are they justto make the best of the classification until such a time as the job can be redesigned or they leave their position and the job is reconfigured? How do we compensate someone who seemingly does more than their new job peers because they have some odd extra duties added to their position?

A.Job titles are intended to represent the majority of job duties being performed. The general rule of thumb in classification is that an appropriate job title should reflect at least 51% of the job. That means that some jobs won’t “fit” 100% into one job title. If a job does not appropriately fit into a listed job title, the supervisor should contact their HR Classification Analyst to discuss (1) other possibilities in existing job classes, (2) the creation of a more appropriate job class/title, or (3) using a working title that better captures the specifics of a particular job. In considering possible career paths, an employee may want to explore the listings in the appropriate Career Family (which can be found on the HR website), or contact an HR Representative to discuss career possibilities further.

Q.This may seem petty but there seems to be an overuse of the word specialist. It seems that everyone has become a specialist. Out of 154 new Staff job codes, 42 (27%) are specialists. For most it seems like rearranging chairs to rename some of the job codes. Administrative Assistant (which is an industry standard) to Administrative Specialist - how is that more descriptive? Most people feel the new titles are just as vague or in fact less descriptive of their job. I am sure that much research went into the decisions over the names, but for most of us, we feel less clear about what we do based on our titles.

A.There was a design team put together with representatives from the Tampacampus, USF Health, and the regional campuses that worked hard to determine a titling structure to capture the work done here at USF. Many sources were reviewed and considered when designing the structure, including “best practices” from our peer and aspirational institutions and survey data. One of the main goals was to select titles that both successfully captured the different flavors of similar work throughout USF (including various departments, campuses, etc.) and were recognizable to the “outside world”. We have been responsive to the feedback we have received on certain titles, and have made appropriate adjustments throughout the process. We realize the selection of titles will not please everyone, and working titles may continue to be necessary to capture and represent most appropriately the essence of a particular position, particularly where unique work is being done or multiple hats are worn. We will commit to continue discussions on titling in order to ensurethat our system is fluid enough to make necessary changes as we go forward.

Q. Do we really not have anyone left at the University who is a Secretary or has the title become obsolete?

A. Actually, that one is more “market driven” than anything else. More than ten years ago, there was a shift in the marketplace away from “Secretary”. Movement was made in all directions, but most commonly to “Administrative Assistant”. You can see evidence of this shift in many ways, for example, in job listings and even the shift from “Secretary’s Day” to “Administrative Professionals Day”. Technology has also had a tremendous impact on what traditionally had been handled by the secretarial profession. The bottom line is, while we continue to have support roles and individuals who provide clerical assistance, we believe the “secretarial” title is obsolete in the marketplace.

Page 1 of 3