200
EXERCISE 23
USING COMPA-RATIOS TO ANALYZE PAY INCREASE REQUESTS
1. The tables below contain the compa-ratios for each employee and for each pay grade. With
spreadsheet software, these computations can be completed quickly and the results of changes to
various values can easily be evaluated. An additional column was added to
compute the percentage (in decimal form) of the proposed pay increase. Instructors may wish to
use this information to discuss whether or not the proposed pay increases are consistent with
guidelines for performance increases contained in Exercise 27, Exhibit 27-5.
APPLICATIONS PROGRAMMER I—PAY GRADE 7
Length of Service Performance Reviews Annual Compensation Compa-ratio Pay
Employee Name Years Months Latest Previous Current Proposed Current Proposed % Increase
1. Stan Miller 7 3 $35,990 $39,950 0.82 0.86 011
2. Charlotte Kimball 11 3 $40,300 $41,980 0.92 0.90 0.04
Midpoint
*6 $264,000 $279,840
APPLICATIONS PROGRAMMER II—PAY GRADE 8
Length of Service Performance Reviews Annual Compensation Compa-ratio Pay
Employee Name Years Months Latest Previous Current Proposed Current Proposed % Increase
1. Wayne Erwin 11 3 $39,470 $44,600 0.78 0.83 0.13
2. Joy King 1 6 3 3 $43,010 $48,600 0.85 0.91 0.13
3. Sharon Woods 1 9 3 3 $42,900 $48,050 0.85 0.90 0.12
APPLICATIONS PROGRAMMER III—PAY GRADE 9
Length of Service Performance Reviews Annual Compensation Compa-ratio Pay
Employee Name Years Months Latest Previous Current Proposed Current Proposed %
Increase
1. Sam Ketch 1 10 4 3 $52,370 $58,130 0.90 0.94 0.11
2. Brenda Sawyer 2 11 3 3 $51,210 $58,380 0.88 0.95 0.14
2. Based on the compa-ratios, individual rates of pay tend to be on the low side even though overall
pay increase recommendations are quite high. This might well be explained by the fact that Olympia
3. Most of the pay adjustment requests do not appear to be disproportionate relative to appraisal