Pay and Benefits Best Practices

HR Pay Model

The author of this report has been asked to assess the chapter titles for the class text and then compare them to the pay model shown in figure two of the assignment. The aim of the assignment is to align each chapter title with the corresponding part of the pay model. There are sixteen chapters in total and four overall parts to the pay model, with the latter being alignment, competitiveness, contributors and management. The class text in question is Strategic Compensation by Martocchio. While some of the chapters in the book could technically be assigned to more than one part of the pay model, the fit between chapter and one particular part of the pay model is usually pretty clear.

Analysis

The first chapter in the book is called strategic compensation. One could really assign that to contributors, competitiveness or alignment in one form or another. However, the competitiveness part of the model pertains largely to pay structure and so that would probably be the best place to put it. However, the word "strategic" would imply that there is some thought behind who gets paid what and why and thus all four parts of the pay model could theoretically come into play depending on what is being evaluated and so forth. The second chapter is contextual influences on compensation practices. This would also probably fall into the competitiveness part of the model, with "market definitions" being perhaps the best thing that aligns with the "contextual influences." One could also make the case for management since they are the people making the ultimate call (Martocchio, 2015).

The third chapter is traditional bases for pay. This would clearly be under the contributors role as that is where that would come from, whether it be seniority-based, merit-based or a combination of the two. In the case of merit, the proper guidelines and pathways would have to be defined and established. The fourth chapter is incentive pay and this is also clearly under the "contributors" part of the model given that "incentive programs" is clearly mentioned on the far right side of the arrow. One should stick with "contributors" again when looking at chapter five, which is person-focused pay. When looking at "building internally consistent compensation systems" and "building pay structures that recognize employee contribution," the seventh and eighth chapter respectively, one could point to contributors as well but the author of this report would actually point to alignment as the facets of that part of the model are more in line with what is being stated in the chapter title. Indeed, work analysis, descriptions and internal structure all match up to those titles quite neatly (Martocchio, 2015).

When it comes to the ninth chapter, the title of that chapter is employee benefits. Really, that would fall under competitiveness because the market definitions and surveys mentioned in that part of the model would define what prospective or current employees are expecting, what the normal benefits are for a given market and the perceptions from each side. Much the same thing can be said for the tenth chapter, which pertains to employer-sponsored retirement plans and health insurance programs. This would especially be true in light of the recent passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, more commonly referred to as ObamaCare. Health insurance is indeed required for employees meeting certain criteria. Even before that was the case starting fairly recently after the bill's passage in 2010, employees certainly expected a certain level of benefits if a job was full-time and was in a certain industry. One could also point to costs, however, when it comes to benefits like that (health insurance in particular) so one could make the argument for health insurance being on the management tract of the pay model (Martocchio, 2015).