Survey of bonus and market supplement schemes in the public and private sectors
23-Dec-08
During November 2008 the RTPI carried out a sample online survey of bonus and supplement schemes in the public and private sectors.
1. Please describe your employer
- Consultancy sector 28%
- Council/Authorities 69%
- Universities/Academia 1%
- National Park Authority 1%
- Not for profit/charitable 1%
2. What type of supplement does your employer currently offer in addition to your annual salary?
- My employer does not offer additional payments 55%
- Up to 10% of the annual salary 10%
- Between 11% and 20% of annual salary 5%
- A flat sum up to £5000 15%
- A flat sum between £5001 and £10000 1%
- Either a percentage or a flat sum, whichever is the higher amount 3%
other examples provided include;
- a discretionary percentage of turnover from planning fees
- discretionary ‘well done Awards’ between £200 and £500
- London Underground travel card zones 1 and 2, and payment of professional fees
- discretionary bonus based on performance of company as a whole, regional office and group
- 50% of total amount invoiced after achieving 3 times the annual salary amount
- (6% did not respond to this question)
3. If your employer has advised that additional payments will be reviewed as a result of the economic climate (2008/9), then do you anticipate one of the following?
- Bonus/market supplement schemes suspended 60%
- Bonus/market supplement schemes reduced 40%
(75% did not respond to this question)
4. Do you agree with the following statement; market supplements have played an important role in retaining key planning staff
- Strongly agree 30%
- Agree 27%
- Neither agree or disagree 26%
- Disagree 10%
- Disagree strongly 7%
(8% did not respond to this question)
Additional comments include:
- “I don't think they make much difference to staff as they could get their salary (with bonuses) matched elsewhere.” (consultancy)
- “As of today, a market supplement has only been made public for one vacant post (and not for others). Other staff may have been assured of market supplements in order to retain them, but details of this are confidential.” (council/local authority)
- “If the job market was stronger I would seek employment with an employer who operated a more transparent and fairer approach.” (consultancy)
- “Excellent working environment and career progression/training opportunities would be more successful in retaining key planning staff.” (council/local authority)
- “The council does not appear to be interested in retaining key planning staff as no attempts are ever made to keep them!” (council/local authority).”
- “We have never had a bonus scheme but staff retention is still pretty good” (council/local authority).”
- “I think people may be more interested in knowing they have a solid, regular salary, which is not dependent on factors beyond their control. Bonus payments for planning consultancy only really work in a development planning context whereas much of my company's work is planning policy work for local and national governments, masterplanning etc.“ (consultancy)
- “Most schemes are flat-rate sums & are not index-linked. Therefore their value will continue to decrease as will their usefulness. It is also likely that they will be used to cover for downgrading arising from the job evaluation process and so will unlikely provide any incentive at all in the long-term. Why not just pay your professionals better? (council/local authority).”
- “My authority believes in paying the lowest level possible and seems unconcerned to retain planning staff for continuity of quality public service (council/local authority).”
survey received a total of 79 responses
- Author:
- Chris Sheridan
- Publisher:
- The Royal Town Planning Institute
- Date:
- 23-Dec-08
- Categories:
- Planners in the Workplace
- Sections:
- Member Services
This article has been read 2180 times.
