top of page

MUNASA 2022 Salary Policy Survey Results and Salary Inequity

MUNASA Bulletin – November 2022

Dear Members: This bulletin is to update you on some of the various issues that MUNASA has been focused on over the past few months. These items are of great concern to MUNASA and our members and this is evidenced by the unprecedented number of emails and phone calls we have been receiving, especially during the last few weeks. 1- Salary inequity between unionized and non-unionized employees With the implementation of the new MUNACA Collective Agreement, we are encountering a flood of phone calls principally from M1 excluded and M2 managers expressing great concerns over the inequity of salaries that has developed. Many managers are now earning thousands of dollars less than M1 unionized employees, who are their direct reports. Some managers are questioning the benefit of having been “promoted” from a unionized position into a non-unionized one. They are penalized by losing their floating days, frequently working longer hours, and their salaries are not competitive with the market. In addition, when short staffed, the expectation is for them to carry additional responsibilities until positions are filled. The inequity that has materialized is significant and unacceptable. MUNASA has met with Labour & Employee Relations three times since September 2022, and we are still waiting to receive an explanation as to how the University will resolve these inequities. Surely, the University was aware this was going to occur long before the new MUNACA Collective Agreement was implemented. Why was the University not prepared for this? Please be assured that MUNASA is seriously concerned with these issues and will continue to press for a solution to these inequities. Motivation at work and retention is a growing concern at the University. There are fewer job applicants, increased departures, and more employees considering early retirement. The feedback we are receiving from MUNASA members is that the main reasons for this is less competitive salaries and the interest in more flexible remote work. The University’s inability to hire and retain employees has put a greater burden on managers. We believe that adjusting salary scales for managers and increasing remote work when feasible requires immediate attention. 2- Job Profile Review Committee MUNASA is requesting a thorough review of the Job Profile Descriptions through the mechanism of a Job Profile Review Committee. We know there are many employees matched to the wrong job family or are not at the correct grade considering the level of their responsibilities. A review of the ADM2A, SAF2A, HRM2A job families, to name only a few, need to be addressed immediately. Most level 2 positions have been raised to a Grade 05, whereas these job profiles remain a Grade 04. For example, Administrative Officers are a grade below most job profiles at the same level. Yet, the expectation is for them to be subject matter experts in human resources, finance, and student affairs. There are also positions that are not matched to the correct job family, for instance that’s what led to the rematch of the Academic Affairs Officers with a new job profile and grade increase. How has the University failed to rectify this for so long? Currently, MUNASA is being told that the University does not see the need for a Job Profile Review Committee claiming to not have the resources to dedicate to this initiative. However, MUNASA sees this as a means to improve equity. 3- MUNASA 2022 Salary Policy Survey Results As you may recall, we circulated a Salary Policy Survey to our members back in August 2022. The following is a breakdown of the survey results. While only the graphs are attached to preserve the confidentiality of our members; the comments revealed an overwhelming dissatisfaction with how the “Annual Compensation Review” has been practiced. One-third of respondents had more than 15 years of service at McGill and another one-third between 1-5 years of service. Over 50% were supervisors. Over 70% of respondents find that the Annual Compensation Review exercise, which is meant to set the foundation and process for fair and equitable recognition of all MPEX employees, does not measure up. Over 90% of respondents would like the economic increase separated from the performance/merit increase. More than 50% did not find the information included in the 2022 HR notes about the 2022 Annual Compensation Review to be clear and easily understood. Over 80% found it unfair and unequitable when a manager receives “Significantly Exceeds Objective” and is in the “Exception Zone” and receives the same merit amount as someone who receives “Consistently Meets Objectives” and is in the “Entry Zone”. This demonstrates a lack of recognition and appreciation for those whose performance is exceptional, and certainly signals that the current system is not designed to, and does not, encourage exceptional performance and professionalism but rests upon a significant amount of “discretion” that, from MUNASA’s perspective, sounds a lot like “arbitrariness” . Additionally, over 80% of respondents have not experienced reaching Zone 2 (95% compa-ratio or above) after being in a role for 5-7 years, while obtaining “Exceed Objectives” for at least the last 3 years of their service. Over 70% disclosed that the performance increase matrix does NOT fairly compensate their performance, work experience, years of service and institutional knowledge. The average Salary Policy envelope since 2012 has been approximately 3-3.5%. More than 96% of respondents do not see these increases as a realistic baseline to offset the cost of living which continues to rise since May 2022 (6.8%). Over 76% support a similar Salary Policy model that is used for Academics, with established dollar amounts per category, rather than receiving random amounts. Over 90% would rather be informed of their merit in writing between established dates like that of academics. Over 85% do not believe salary scales for MPEX employees are competitive with other Universities. Over 90% complete a Performance dialogue with their supervisors but only 58% find it to be a reliable tool to evaluate their performance. We have started discussions with the University regarding salary policy for this year. It is noteworthy that in September 2015, MUNASA signed an agreement with the University that states, “The University agrees, from the date of signing of the present Agreement and before implementing a salary policy concerning M staff, that it shall hold good faith discussions with MUNASA to discuss this topic and, in formulating the policy, shall take into account the concerns expressed by MUNASA on behalf of its members”. MUNASA wants to see the economic increase restored. We want specified dollar amounts per category and a specific time period when managers are informed about their merit, as it is practiced with academics. We want the merit exercise to be taken seriously, based on equitable and predetermined guidelines, and for it to be used to recognize performance rather than being focused on “bringing employees to the mid-point”. Whereas an annual compensation review should be carried out to ensure our salaries are not lower than other universities or with the market. In conclusion, while our bulletin may come across as discouraging, be assured that we will continue to persevere on behalf of our members and pursue equity. With best wishes, The MUNASA Executive Download MUNASA Bulletin - MUNASA 2022 Salary Policy Survey Results and Salary Inequity

Recent Posts

See All

MUNASA Special Bulletin - December 20, 2023

Dear members, As you no doubt will remember, MUNASA filed judicial proceedings in June 2023 against the University to contest its decision to unilaterally amend the following Personnel policies effect


bottom of page