Public Safety Survey (2008)
Survey Introduction and Methodology
On behalf of the State of California Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) CPS Human Resource Services (CPS) conducted a Total Compensation Survey relative to a variety of public safety related benchmark classifications. A Total Compensation Survey seeks data with regard to all the key components of compensation in order to quantify the total value of those components and facilitate comparisons of the complete compensation packages offered by various employers.
In the case of public safety related classifications, there are often numerous compensation components beyond base salary that are commonly offered to employees. These may include additional compensation for obtaining specific education or training, or for work related activities conducted before and/or after regular shifts and during normal meal periods and breaks, or for a variety of other reasons. For this Total Compensation Survey, the following data elements were gathered from survey respondents and used to determine the Total Compensation provided to each benchmark class.
- Minimum and maximum base salary
- Longevity pay offered to employees at the twenty-year service level
- Education pay offered to employees for obtaining a college degree and/or Peace Officer Standards and Training certifications (data was collected for pay incentives offered for the most commonly attained education level - a Bachelor's degree - rather than a Master's degree and other infrequently attained levels)
- Other pay typically offered to all members of the class, including meal time pay, roll call pay, etc.
- Uniform allowances
- Employer contributions for health, dental and vision insurance, or for a cafeteria benefit plan
- Employer pickup of the employee retirement contribution, if any
- Employer contributions to employee deferred compensation accounts
- Employer contributions to Social Security/Medicare
The combination of all of these compensation components typically exceeds the level of the base salary range quite substantially, and constitutes the Total Compensation offered to employees.
Total Compensation data was sought primarily within California, but data was also gathered from employers outside of the State. In California, data was sought from thirty-seven cities and counties and the Federal Government, and presented on both a statewide basis and broken down into four geographic regions as shown below.
| Region | Agencies |
|---|---|
| Northern California | City of Redding City of Roseville City of Sacramento County of Mendocino County of Placer County of Sacramento County of Sutter Federal Government |
| Bay Area | City of Oakland City of San Jose City/County of San Francisco County of Alameda County of Contra Costa County of Santa Clara Federal Government |
| Central California | City of Bakersfield City of Fresno City of Modesto City of Stockton County of Fresno County of Kern County of Merced County of San Joaquin County of San Luis Obispo County of Stanislaus Federal Government |
| Southern California | City of Anaheim City of Chula Vista City of Long Beach City of Los Angeles City of Riverside City of San Diego City of Santa Ana County of Imperial County of Los Angeles County of Orange County of Riverside County of San Bernardino County of San Diego County of Ventura Federal Government |
Note that Federal Government data was included in each regional breakdown, including any geographic differential provided to Federal employees in that region, in order to provide an accurate reflection of the regional public sector labor market, in which the Federal Government is a significant employer. Federal government data, without any geographic differential, was included only once within the display of statewide data.
Also note that the County of Imperial was the only survey respondent for which data could not be validated adequately for any survey benchmark class. Therefore, while the County appears in the table above, it does not appear in the data spreadsheets that are presented in the appendices to this report.
Outside of California data was collected from the Federal Government and ten states as listed below.
| Non-California Survey Agencies |
|---|
| State of Arizona |
| State of Florida |
| State of Illinois |
| State of Nevada |
| State of New York |
| State of Ohio |
| State of Oregon |
| State of Pennsylvania |
| State of Texas |
| State of Washington |
| Federal Government |
The non-California data was gathered with the knowledge and expectation that California compensation levels would tend to exceed those of most other states for a variety of reasons, including basic cost of living differences. However, it was felt that the data could be informative with regard to general compensation practices in other states, and with regard to the relative compensation levels of various benchmark classes as compared to those compensation relationships in California.
Ten benchmark classes were included in this Total Compensation Survey for California data collection, and sixteen classes for data collection outside of California. They were divided into three groups: the Patrol Group, the Corrections Group, and the Other Law Enforcement Group. The Patrol Group consisted of the Patrol Officer/State Trooper, Sergeant and Captain classes for California data collection. The class Regional/Division Chief was added for data collection outside of California. The Corrections Group consisted of the Correctional Officer, Correctional Sergeant and Correctional Captain classes for California data collection. The classes Warden and Parole Agent were added for data collection outside of California. The Other Law Enforcement Group consisted of the Investigator, Supervising Investigator, Criminalist and Park Ranger classes for California data collection. The classes Special Agent, Special Agent-in-Charge, and Fish and Game Warden were added for data collection outside of California.
The next section of this report provides description and discussion of each of these benchmark classes.
CPS prepared Total Compensation Survey instruments that were distributed to survey respondents on February 1, 2007, requesting data on compensation rates and practices in effect as of January 1, 2007. A sample of the Survey Instrument appears as Appendix 5 to this report.
In addition to the completed Survey Instruments provided by survey respondents, CPS gathered other documents such as Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), salary and benefit schedules, compensation polices, etc. that were used as sources for identifying the detailed compensation practices and policies of respondents. Data Collection Forms were developed and used by CPS consultants to ensure that comprehensive, consistent data was gathered from each respondent to the maximum possible extent. A sample Data Collection Form appears as Appendix 6 to this report. Data collection was conducted through May 2007.
Since this was a Total Compensation Survey, its key results include the State of California Total Compensation for each benchmark class, compared to the Total Compensation reported by survey respondents for each benchmark class. In making those comparisons, the State of California maximum Total Compensation, and the median maximum Total Compensation reported by respondents served as the data comparison point. The median represents the midpoint of the data - the point at which there are an equal number of higher and lower maximum Total Compensation amounts that were reported by survey respondents.
Note that there has been no weighting or statistical manipulation of the survey data. This survey gathered the actual base salary and Total Compensation provided to the benchmark classes by specific California and non-California public employers. This report presents comparisons of that data, on statewide, regional and non-California bases, to the actual base salary and Total Compensation offered to those classes by the State of California. No weighting or statistical manipulation of the survey data is required in making these types of comparisons.
The summary tables presented in this report also include the State of California maximum base salary for each benchmark class compared to the median maximum base salary reported by survey respondents for each benchmark class. However, because of the prevalence of compensation components beyond base salary among public safety classifications, Total Compensation is considered to be a more reliable and accurate method of making compensation comparisons.
In these tables the relationship of the State of California and survey respondent base salary and Total Compensation data is presented as a percentage in the "State Relationship to Median" column. The number shown is the percentage by which the State of California base salary or Total Compensation would have to be adjusted to equal the survey median. If the State of California base salary or Total Compensation is higher than the survey median, a positive percentage is shown; if it is lower, a negative percentage is shown.
Four appendices (Statewide Data, Regional Data, Non-California Data, and Survey Responses) contain a great deal of detailed data gathered in this Total Compensation survey, including the specific compensation data reported by each survey respondent for each benchmark classification; and other information not included in the Total Compensation spreadsheet, such as work week schedule practices, retirement policies, and policies regarding retiree health benefits, of survey respondents. For information purposes, the detailed data included in three appendices (Statewide Data, Regional Data, and Non-California Data) also compares the mean, or average, State of California maximum base salary and maximum Total Compensation to the mean maximum base salary and Total Compensation reported by survey respondents for each benchmark class.
Public Safety Survey (2008)
- Survey Introduction and Methodology
- Executive Summary
- Discussion of Benchmark Classes
- California Statewide Survey Results
- California Regional Survey Results
- Non-California Survey Results
- Conclusion
Updated October 6, 2008 at 12:30 PM.