Senate Joint Resolution No. 13 provides in part: "That it is the policy of the Commonwealth, that its employees be compensated at a rate comparable to the rate of compensation for employees in the private sector of the Commonwealth in similar occupations...." In accordance with this Resolution, the Division of Personnel has conducted its annual compensation review, the results of which are attached.

The survey consists of data collected from sixty-five participants representing private industry, hospitals, local governments in Virginia, and State governments in the Southeastern United States. The data is presented as percentage deviations from the minimum and maximum State salaries for comparable classes utilized by participants. For example, a figure of -4.6/-4.7 indicates that the State salary range should be increased 4.6% at the minimum and 4.7% at the maximum in order to be equal to the average salary paid by the participants for that particular occupational group.

A summary sheet [Attachment 1] indicates the overall percentage deviations between the major groups of participants and the Commonwealth. Additional attachments detail the classes surveyed and the reported salaries for each participant. Further, a separate sheet [Attachment 9] indicates the comparison of the Commonwealth's ranges with participants in the Northern Virginia area. Because the Commonwealth pays a salary differential in this area, it was felt to be appropriate to handle this data separately. Also, because the data from the College Placement Council and the American Management Association was nationwide in its scope and only focused on the hiring or minimum salary, it was not included in the total column of Attachment 1. A complete list of survey participants is included in Attachment 10.

The survey was expanded this year to include private business firm data from the Tidewater, Roanoke and Charlottesville regions in addition to Richmond. Because of this, an attempt was made to display the percentage deviations by four regions in Virginia. This is shown as Attachment 8. Important to remember, however, is that approximately 30% of the State work force is located in the Richmond area. One fact that clearly becomes evident from this data is that the regional differences are not uniform. That is, one occupational group may be low in one area while another may be high in the same area indicating that local labor market conditions have a greater effect on wages than does cost of living. Further, while the deviations are large in some cases they are significantly less than those evidenced in the Northern Virginia region were we not already paying a differential there. Thus, continued support of a differential only in the Northern Virginia area is evidenced.

In the fringe benefit area, the Commonwealth pays approximately 22.2% of the gross payroll to cover the cost of leave, insurance, retirement,. etc. Recent figures indicate a nationwide industrial average of 26.3% for fringe benefits.

Several factors are important to consider in analyzing the survey data. First, each of the-participant groups (Statewide business firms, CSC data, etc.) was given an equal weight in the computation of the total percentage deviation. This fact is relevant, for example, if one's view is that the Commonwealth should be more competitive with other states. If this were true, then one would want ??o give more weight to the CSC data. ·Second, a review of the width of salary ranges indicates that the participants generally have ranges of greater width than those of the Commonwealth with the participants averaging 40-42% and the Commonwealth averaging 30-35%. Finally, a great many of the participants surveyed indicated they were studying and planning to make increases in their salaries over the next few months ranging from 5-12%. For example, the City of Richmond is planning a 5% increase January 1, 1976. Because their plans had not been finalized, we were forced to use the data currently in effect. This important factor should not be underemphasized when reviewing the total situation, particularly in light of the Federal Government's October 1st 5% increase.