What took so long? — Class and comp process now on right track, but actual transparency requires full collaboration throughout the process

Last week, the University of Idaho announced it will implement an additional review process for the classification and compensation system that received wide-spread criticism from staff for a lack of transparency and communication. 

The decision came after an appeals committee training meeting UI deans were invited to. Over the course of the meeting, the deans suggested an additional review process take place in order to assure that the class and comp system is as accurate as possible. Interim President Don Burnett listened to what the deans said — the same thing staff have been saying all along.

The initial vetting process happened in the spring, but deans were only allowed about one hour to look over all the positions within their individual colleges and weren’t able to make campus-wide comparisons.

Why did HR take so long to start an adequate review of the class and comp system? A review process of this magnitude should have happened six months ago, with ample time to evaluate the categorization of staff positions, instead of giving UI’s higher-ups one hour to review what could be a few hundred positions within their unit.

One proposed aspect of the additional review process is to allow the flexibility to compare similar positions with other colleges, allowing for a more accurate classification system. That’s great, but why did it not happen during the first review process?

HR moved through the process rapidly and acted unilaterally. Now, UI staff must deal with the consequences, which include possibly delaying the implementation of the new system and building a negative image.

There should have been more communication from HR throughout the process, along with allowing more dean input into the policy decisions. UI administration should have stepped in long ago and made the decisions they are now making up for.

In some cases, clear quick decisions coming from well-informed administrators are needed. This was not one of those cases. With a change of this magnitude, many voices are needed to produce a system that can be well understood.

HR failed to do this and the results are a confused and disgruntled staff, an additional review process and the need to clean up a mess that shouldn’t have been made in the first place.

The behavior by UI administration and HR is disconcerting. Not just for all employees, but also for students. A similar far-reaching decision that affects students could meet the same fate as class and comp, creating potential for all kinds of disaster. We hope not, but it’s a question worth asking in the wake of this most recent debacle.

The new class and comp could have been an easy transition for the infrastructure of UI. Unfortunately, it was botched by HR with lack of input and communication.

–RT

Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.