Limited financial resources may prove a hindrance to the adoption of a proposal for lower salary raises to higher-grade professional and scientific positions at the university.

The proposal, intended to address salary concerns of non-faculty university employees, is awaiting approval by the administration. If adopted, the university could resolve issues with its pay matrix and classification system, said Trevor Riedemann, co-chairman of the Professional and Scientific Council’s compensation and benefits committee.

Riedemann said the Professional and Scientific Council’s recommendation is to offer lower salary raises to higher-grade positions. The proposed three-year timeline for the plan also calls for an aggregate 3 percent increase in professional and scientific salaries, he said.

The council has recommended the university develop a time-phased inflationary inequity adjustment plan, said Riedemann, assistant scientist for the Ames Laboratory.

“We have provided an illustration,” he said. “The administration can choose to accept, reject or modify it.”

Warren Madden, vice president for Business and Finance, said the administration plans to look at the proposal in the next few weeks.

“There are a series of budget and cost issues,” he said. “The resources to implement it will be a financial challenge.”

The professional and scientific classification system catalogs jobs according to their impact on the university.

Each position is assigned a grade value from P11 to P20. For instance, an academic adviser I is P11, athletic ticket manager is P15 and the dean of students is P20.

Each pay grade then has a minimum, midpoint and maximum salary. Riedemann said the midpoint is considered the average market value of the position. “It is a market-driven matrix,” he said.

Riedemann said the system was implemented in 1993.

“It was envisioned that an employee should move through grade over the course of 10 to 12 years,” he said.

Riedemann said this has been one of the problems.

“Based on my three years as a P16, it will take me an additional 15.5 years to achieve the midpoint,” he said.

Under the current system, P11 to P14 level jobs have had a negative increase in the last 10 years while the higher grades have seen significant increases, Riedemann said. Inflation has been one of the main factors in the inequities.

“This is the result of 10 years of [the matrix] growing at a rate slower than inflation,” Riedemann said.

The system was set up for a review after 10 years, but the cost of an outside consultant is an issue, Riedemann said.

Rex Heer, council president, agreed the financial issues might hold back the plan. “Options become limited if we don’t have any money,” said Heer, graphic designer for the Instructional Technology Center. “We understand this is not a top priority, but we want to keep it on the burner.”