The Joint Committee on
Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review
Report # 453
A Review of the Mississippi Employment Security Commission’s Implementation of Fiscal Year 2003 Salary Realignments
Executive Summary
Introduction
In response to an employee complaint, the PEER Committee reviewed the salary survey process used to establish salary ranges of positions within the Mississippi Employment Security Commission (MESC) and the agency’s compliance with legislative mandates and State Personnel Board (SPB) regulations in the determination of FY 2003 salary increases.
This project stemmed from questions from an MESC employee regarding the salary realignments that occurred in FY 2003. The complainant had concerns regarding the methodology for developing the percentage realignments for positions within MESC. The ranges of percentage increases for MESC positions were from 2.13% to 10.57%. The complainant believed that the MESC Unemployment Insurance Field Rep (Representative) positions deserved a higher percentage increase because salary data he independently gathered from other states indicated higher salaries for comparable positions.
PEER sought to determine:
the salary survey process used to establish realignment amounts and salary ranges of MESC positions; and,
whether MESC has complied with legislative mandates and SPB regulations in the determination of position realignment amounts and annual salary increases
Conclusions
MESC based salary realignments implemented in January 2003 on SPB’s standard survey practice and implemented them in accordance with SPB’s regulations and legislative mandates.
The State Personnel Board develops realignment recommendations to the Legislature as required by MISS. CODE ANN. Section 25-9-133 (1972) and as outlined in SPB’s policies. The SPB develops its legislative realignment recommendations by conducting a yearly salary survey that compares state government salaries to those of other relevant labor markets. SPB developed the FY 2003 realignment recommendations for MESC positions based on data gathered through its annual salary survey process in accordance with standard survey practice.
As noted above, the complainant had believed that the MESC Unemployment Insurance Field Rep positions deserved a higher percentage increase because salary data he independently gathered from other states indicated higher salaries for comparable positions. However, methodology used by the complainant was erroneous in three different ways:
the complainant used states that are not included by SPB in its survey;
the job titles used by the complainant were not comparable; and,
the complainant did not use the correct period for the comparison. He surveyed 2003 salaries rather than 2001 salaries, on which Mississippi’s FY 2003 realignment increases were based (because of the two-year lap between the budget preparation and implementation).
In FY 2003, SPB checked each agency to ensure legislative mandates were followed and that the realignments occurred. MESC has complied with SPB-developed and legislatively approved realignments.