compensation planning outlook 2020...compensation planning outlook 2020 is the 38th edition of this...

Impact paper October 2019

Compensation Planning Outlook 2020

PrefaceCompensation Planning Outlook 2020 is the 38th edition of this publication, which summarizes the results of The Conference Board of Canada’s annual compensation survey and forecast. In June 2019, a questionnaire was sent to 2,551 predominately large and medium-sized Canadian organizations operating in a variety of regions and sectors. A total of 326 respondents participated in the survey, for a response rate of 13 per cent.

This publication was prepared under the auspices of the Conference Board’s Compensation Research Centre (CRC) and was made possible through the ongoing support of the funding members and survey participants. We owe a special thank you to all the individuals who took the time to answer this year’s comprehensive questionnaire and to the many organizations that participate year after year. Their efforts are very much appreciated, as it is through the commitment of respondents that The Conference Board of Canada is able to produce this report.

AcknowledgementsThe authors acknowledge the input, review, and feedback contributions provided by Darren De Jean and Bryan Benjamin. They also thank Monica Haberl, Brad Seward, Jonathan Francis, Natalie Arruda, Amanda Holmes, and Leane Swales for their assistance.

Contents i Summary for executives ii Key findings iv Slower economic growth continues iv Organizations facing human

capital challenges v What page is that on?

1 Section 1: Compensation planning 2 Key findings 2 Managing base pay 8 Incentive pay

17 Section 2: Collective bargaining 18 Key findings18 Wage increases 19 Short-term incentive pay 19 Negotiation issues

21 Section 3: Human capital and talent trends 22 Key findings 22 Rewards strategies and priorities 23 Managing performance 25 Recruitment and retention 26 Turnover 29 Retirement 31 Employee absences

Appendix A 33 Glossary 33 Employee group definitions 33 Base pay increase definitions

Appendix B 34 Respondent profile

Appendix C 36 Participating organizations

Appendix D 41 Bibliography


Summary for executives

Key findings• Organizations are planning moderate base salary increases for 2020, with the average

base pay increase for non-unionized employees projected to be 2.5 per cent.

• Projected increases are highest in the pharmaceutical and chemical industry (2.9 per cent) and lowest in education (2.1 per cent).

• Short-term incentive plans remain an important part of the total rewards package. Over three-quarters of survey respondents (79 per cent) have at least one of these plans in place.

• Looking ahead to 2020, 18 per cent of compensation planners expect the size of their workforce to increase, with 7 per cent anticipating workforce reductions.

Summary for executives | The Conference Board of Canada

Find Conference Board research at conferenceboard.ca. iii

Real GDP in Canada is forecast to remain below the 2.0 per cent mark over the near term. This is due to several factors, including weak export and investment spending linked, in part, to the ongoing global trade tensions.1 As economic growth slows, organizations are planning moderate salary increases for next year.

1 Conference Board of Canada, The, Canadian Outlook Executive Summary: Autumn 2019.

2 Unless stated otherwise, all average salary increase percentages reported in the text include zero per cent increases. For averages excluding zero per cent increases, please consult tables 1–4.


4 The public sector includes federal and provincial government departments, agencies, and Crown corporations; municipalities; hospitals; and universities and colleges.

The average pay increase for non-unionized employees is projected to be 2.5 per cent in 20202—slightly higher than the 2.0 per cent inflation forecast for the year ahead.3

Salary increases are expected to vary by region, sector, and industry:

• Regionally, Saskatchewan leads with the highest projected base salary increase at 2.9 per cent.

• The lowest base salary increases are expected in Alberta at 2.2 per cent.

• Private sector salary increases are expected to be 2.6 per cent in 2020, while the average increase for employees in the public sector4 is expected to be 2.4 per cent.

• Projected increases are highest in the pharmaceutical and chemical industry, at 2.9 per cent, and lowest in education, at 2.1 per cent.

• Negotiated base wage increases for unionized employees are anticipated to be 1.9 per cent in 2020. Public sector negotiated wage increases are projected to be 1.8 per cent, slightly lower than the expected average increase of 1.9 per cent in the private sector.

This year, 82.0 per cent of employees received a base salary increase, similar to last year (81.2 per cent). Among those receiving increases, the average increase was 2.9 per cent. Only 2 per cent of organizations are planning to implement a salary freeze in 2020, down from 4 per cent in 2019.

Average increases to salary ranges (or “structures”) are expected to be 1.4 per cent next year, the same as the average reported range increase in 2019. Among organizations with salary structures in place, 28 per cent held ranges constant in 2019 and 23 per cent are planning to do so in 2020.

http://www.conferenceboard.ca


Find Conference Board research at conferenceboard.ca. iv

Slower economic growth continuesThe Canadian economy is set for a period of slower growth due to weakness in the global economy and global trade tensions. Overall, real GDP is forecast to expand by 1.6 per cent in 2019 and 1.8 per cent in 2020.5 However, news on the economic front is not


6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

all bad. Strong population and income growth will continue to drive demand for housing and for household goods and services.

Canada’s labour market remains in good shape, as the economy has generated 304,000 new jobs since the beginning of this year.6 The labour market is expected to weaken over the rest of 2019 and into the first quarter of 2020, as Canada’s population cannot support the job growth seen this year on a sustainable basis. Not only is Canada facing a retirement surge that is slowing labour force growth, but weaker economic growth will ease firm hiring. The unemployment rate will continue to decline over the near term and average 5.6 per cent in 2020.7

The majority of organizations are relatively optimistic about business conditions in 2020, with 78 per cent expecting conditions to improve or stay the same. Only 5 per cent expect conditions to deteriorate, while the remaining 17 per cent are unsure what to expect.

Organizations facing human capital challengesResults from this year’s survey indicate that 62 per cent of organizations are experiencing difficulty recruiting and/or retaining particular skills, similar to the 64 per cent that reported these challenges last year. Organizations in Ontario are feeling stretched, with 54 per cent

2020 by the numbers

2.5%—average non-unionized projected salary increase

2.9%—highest projected salary increase by industry (pharmaceutical and chemical)

1.4%—average projected increase to salary ranges

2.0%—forecast inflation

Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Summary for executives | The Conference Board of Canada

Find Conference Board research at conferenceboard.ca. v

reporting difficulties. In Quebec, where labour markets are expected to tighten further, the share of organizations reporting challenges increased from 42 per cent in 2018 to 48 per cent this year.

Voluntary turnover in the most recent 12 months was 8.9 per cent—up from 8.1 per cent last year and 7.1 per cent in 2017, suggesting that workers are feeling more comfortable changing employers. The overall voluntary turnover rate increased slightly, going from 4.0 per cent last year to 4.2 per cent in 2019.

Retirement rates continue to rise. An average of 2.4 per cent of the workforce retired last year and projections for next year currently sit at 3.0 per cent. Despite rising retirement rates, employment rates are up 2.4 per cent since last year, thanks to higher workforce participation rates among many age groups and higher levels

8 Statistics Canada, “Labour Force Survey, September 2019.”

of immigration.8 Looking ahead to 2020, 18 per cent of organizations expect their workforce to increase by an average of 7.5 per cent, 7 per cent are expecting a decrease in the size of their workforce, and the majority (64 per cent) are expecting no significant change.

In the past few years, we have seen organizations hold closely to their budgets and provide increases that have been among the lowest over the past 20 years. For 2020, compensation planners continue to offer moderate wage increases that remain ahead of inflation. While these small increases in real wages should benefit household income and consumer spending, labour markets are tightening, and Canadian employers will need to invest and focus on productivity improvements in order to remain competitive.

What page is that on? 2 Base pay increases for

non-unionized employees

8 Incentive plans for non-unionized employees

18 Base pay increases for unionized employees

19 Incentive plans for unionized employees

19 Collective bargaining negotiation issues

23 Performance management

25 Recruitment and retention challenges

26 Employee turnover

29 Retirement rates

31 Employee absence rates

http://www.conferenceboard.ca

Section 1

Compensation planning

Compensation Planning Outlook 2020Compensation planning

Find Conference Board research at conferenceboard.ca. 2

Key findings

• Organizations are planning moderate salary increases for 2020. The average pay increase for non-unionized employees is projected to be 2.5 per cent—similar to the actual increase of 2.6 per cent in 2019.

• Most organizations are planning salary increases for 2020, with only 2 per cent of organizations anticipating a base salary freeze for all employees, down from 4 per cent that froze salaries in 2019.

• Seventy-nine per cent of surveyed organizations have short-term incentive pay plans—typically cash bonuses or incentives—with an average cost of 11.0 per cent of total base pay spending in 2019. Incentive payouts in 2019 met or exceeded targets for more than half of employees across all employee groups.

Managing base pay


Salary increasesThe average pay increase for non-unionized employees is projected to be 2.5 per cent in 2020—slightly higher than the 2.0 per cent total inflation forecast for the year ahead.1 (See Chart 1.)

The overall average salary increase in 2019 was 2.6 per cent—slightly higher than what compensation planners anticipated last year. These salary increases are holding steady, remaining among the lowest in the past 20 years. Among organizations providing increases in 2019, more than half (56 per cent) are providing increases between 2 and 3 per cent—similar to what is planned for 2020. (See Chart 2.)

Eighty-two per cent of employees received a base salary increase in 2019, similar to last year (81.2 per cent). Among employees who received a raise, the average increase was 2.9 per cent. Average range (or “structure”) increases are expected to be 1.4 per cent in 2020, the same range movement we have seen this year.

The public sector anticipates an increase of 2.4 per cent in 2020, while the private sector expects an increase of 2.6 per cent. These are slightly lower than the actual increases in 2019 (which were 2.5 per cent for the public sector and 2.7 per cent for the private sector). While there are regional variations in pay projections, they are not as significant as they have been

Section 1 | The Conference Board of Canada


2 Ibid.

in the past. (See Exhibit 1.) At 2.8 per cent, salary projections in the Atlantic provinces are higher than we’ve seen in recent years, likely due to strong economic growth in the region and record levels of international migration.2 From an industry standpoint, organizations in pharmaceutical and chemical products are projecting the highest increases at 2.9 per cent. (See tables 1–4.)

Just over a quarter (28 per cent) of organizations with salary range structures held ranges constant in 2019, and, looking ahead to 2020, 23 per cent are planning to hold their ranges constant. Only 2 per cent of organizations are planning a salary freeze in 2020, down from 4 per cent that froze salaries in 2019.

At the time of the survey, most organizations (84 per cent) were still working with preliminary salary budgets, with nearly all (94 per cent) planning to provide annual salary increases on a fixed date as opposed to on an anniversary date.

Chart 1Inflation vs. increases(percentage change)

f = forecastNote: Salary increases for non-unionized employees for 2019 (actual) and 2020 (projected) are from the Compensation Planning Outlook 2020 Survey.Sources: The Conference Board of Canada; Employment and Social Development Canada.

1999 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19f 20f

0

1

2

3

4

5

Inflation rate Salary increases for non-unionized employees

Forecast

Chart 2Base salary increase distribution(percentage of organizations; non-unionized employees)

Note: Totals may not add to 100 due to rounding.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

5.0 or more

4.0−4.99

3.0−3.99

2.0−2.99

1.0−1.99

.01−.99

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

12

1211

5652

2331

34

41

2020 projected (n = 254)

2019 actual (n = 277)



Exhibit 12020 projected salary increases(n = 317; per cent; non-unionized employees)


BritishColumbia

2.8%

Alberta2.2%

Saskatchewan2.9%

Manitoba2.3%

Ontario2.5%

Quebec2.8%

Atlantic provinces

2.8%

2.5%Canadianaverage



Table 12019 actual and 2020 projected compensation increases: non-unionized employees, by employee group*(per cent)

2019 actual 2020 projected

Average range increase

Average percentage of employees

receiving an increase

Average salary increase for those

receiving one

Average salary increase among all employees

2019 average base salary

(CDN$)



zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

Overall 1.4 1.9 82.0 2.9 2.6 2.7 n.a. 1.4 1.8 2.5 2.6

Senior executives 1.2 2.0 73.9 3.1 2.7 3.2 300,044 1.3 1.9 2.5 2.8

Executives 1.2 2.0 77.1 2.9 2.6 2.8 206,921 1.3 1.9 2.5 2.7

Management 1.4 2.0 85.6 3.0 2.7 2.8 122,719 1.5 1.9 2.6 2.7

Professional—technical 1.5 2.0 83.1 2.9 2.6 2.8 92,434 1.5 2.0 2.5 2.7

Professional—non-technical 1.4 2.0 83.0 3.0 2.6 2.8 85,547 1.4 1.8 2.6 2.7

Technical and skilled trades 1.6 2.2 83.5 2.8 2.5 2.7 76,327 1.4 1.9 2.6 2.7

Clerical and support 1.5 2.1 83.1 2.8 2.5 2.6 57,386 1.4 1.8 2.6 2.7

Service and production 1.4 2.0 83.1 2.9 2.6 2.7 59,583 1.5 1.9 2.6 2.6

*Employee group definitionsSenior executives: All executives reporting directly to the CEO.Executives: All other executives.Management: Senior and middle management who plan, develop, and implement policies and programs.Professional—technical: Engineers, information technology specialists, developers, etc.Professional—non-technical: All other professionals, such as accountants, lawyers, and doctors, excluding sales.Technical and skilled trades: Technologists, technicians, millwrights, etc.Clerical and support: Administrative staff, clerks, coordinators, assistants, etc. Service and production: Employees providing service, production, maintenance, transportation, etc.

n.a. = not applicableNote: Due to large market adjustments, two organizations were removed from the 2019 sample and one organization from the 2020 sample; “zeros” refers to organizations that reported a zero per cent increase.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

TermsRange increase: Percentage increase to salary ranges (salary structure) among organizations with ranges (often associated with increase to cost of living, or economic adjustment).Percentage of employees receiving an increase: Percentage of employees receiving a base salary increase, as a percentage of all employees in category.Average salary increase for those receiving one: The total percentage increase to base salary from all sources—range, merit, economic, and progression (excluding increases due to promotions). Does not include employees receiving a zero per cent increase.Average salary increase among all employees: The total percentage increase to base salary from all sources—range, merit, economic, and progression (excluding increases due to promotions). Includes employees receiving a zero per cent increase.Average base salary: The average annual base salary in dollars after the increases have been applied.



Table 22019 actual and 2020 projected compensation increases: non-unionized employees, by industry(per cent)

n



Average percentage

of employees receiving an

increase


receiving one

Average salary increase among

all employeesAverage

range increase

Average salary increase among

all employees

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

Overall 317 1.4 1.9 82.0 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.4 1.8 2.5 2.6

Pharmaceutical and chemical 7 2.0 2.0 92.1 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.3 2.9 2.9

Insurance and real estate 23 1.4 2.2 86.6 3.0 2.6 2.6 1.3 1.9 2.8 2.8

Power and utilities 18 1.0 1.5 83.7 3.1 2.8 2.8 1.0 1.5 2.8 2.8

Services—accommodation, tourism, food, entertainment, and personal

16 0.9 1.9 81.1 3.3 3.1 3.4 1.7 2.1 2.8 2.8

Government 30 1.4 1.8 84.5 3.0 2.6 2.8 1.4 1.7 2.7 2.7

Mining, forestry, and agriculture 12 1.9 2.5 91.4 3.3 3.1 3.1 2.2 2.7 2.7 2.7

Food and beverage 6 1.8 2.2 92.7 3.0 2.7 2.7 1.1 1.9 2.6 2.6

Not-for-profit (associations, foundations, charities, etc.) 26 1.4 1.8 86.3 3.0 2.8 2.9 1.4 1.8 2.6 2.7

Services—professional, scientific, and technical 20 1.5 2.1 83.5 3.2 2.9 2.9 1.5 2.0 2.6 2.6

Transportation and warehousing 15 1.3 1.8 88.8 2.9 2.5 2.5 1.6 1.9 2.6 2.6

Wholesale trade 6 1.7 1.7 91.5 3.0 2.2 2.7 1.8 1.8 2.5 2.5

Finance 41 1.3 2.1 78.1 2.8 2.5 2.7 1.4 1.7 2.4 2.5

Communications, telecommunications, and media 10 2.3 2.5 87.6 2.7 2.4 2.4 1.1 1.1 2.4 2.4

Construction 10 1.0 1.5 78.2 3.0 2.4 2.4 1.6 1.6 2.4 2.4

Manufacturing 15 1.7 2.0 80.9 2.7 2.4 2.4 1.7 2.1 2.4 2.4

Oil and gas 22 1.3 2.2 69.9 2.8 2.5 2.8 0.9 1.6 2.4 2.7

Technology 10 2.1 2.4 73.6 2.8 2.6 3.0 0.7 * 2.4 2.8

Health 8 0.5 1.2 61.0 1.9 1.8 2.4 * * 2.3 2.8

Retail trade 11 1.2 1.9 83.8 2.9 2.3 2.3 1.2 1.6 2.2 2.2

Education 11 1.2 1.2 76.8 2.8 2.7 2.7 1.0 1.3 2.1 2.1

*sample size too low to reportNote: Due to large market adjustments, two organizations were removed from the 2019 sample and one organization from the 2020 sample; sample sizes indicate the number of organizations providing a response for at least one actual or projected increase; “zeros” refers to organizations that reported a zero per cent increase.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



Table 32019 actual and 2020 projected compensation increases: non-unionized employees, by sector(per cent)

n






receiving one




zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

Overall 317 1.4 1.9 82.0 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.4 1.8 2.5 2.6

Private sector 238 1.4 2.0 83.9 3.0 2.7 2.7 1.4 1.8 2.6 2.6

Public sector 79 1.3 1.7 76.3 2.7 2.5 2.7 1.3 1.8 2.4 2.6

Note: Due to large market adjustments, two organizations were removed from the 2019 sample and one organization from the 2020 sample; sample sizes indicate the number of organizations providing a response for at least one actual or projected increase; “zeros” refers to organizations that reported a zero per cent increase.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Table 42019 actual and 2020 projected compensation increases: non-unionized employees, by region (per cent)

n






receiving one




zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

zeros included

zeros excluded

Overall 316 1.4 1.9 82.0 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.4 1.8 2.5 2.6

Atlantic provinces 12 1.3 1.6 89.4 2.8 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.7 2.8 2.8

Quebec 24 1.7 1.7 89.8 3.0 2.8 2.8 1.8 1.9 2.8 2.8

Ontario 151 1.4 2.0 85.2 2.9 2.6 2.7 1.3 1.8 2.5 2.5

Manitoba 12 1.6 1.8 85.6 2.8 2.6 2.6 1.6 1.6 2.3 2.3

Saskatchewan 20 1.3 1.8 92.2 3.2 2.9 2.9 1.5 1.6 2.9 2.9

Alberta 65 1.1 2.0 69.0 2.6 2.3 2.7 0.9 1.6 2.2 2.5

British Columbia 32 1.4 2.0 79.4 3.3 2.9 3.0 2.0 2.5 2.8 2.8

Note: Due to large market adjustments, two organizations were removed from the 2019 sample and one organization from the 2020 sample; organizations based in the territories were removed from the analysis due to low sample size; sample sizes indicate the number of organizations providing a response for at least one actual or projected increase; “zeros” refers to organizations that reported a zero per cent increase.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



Differentiating base payBase pay is often used as a tool to motivate and reward performance. Nearly three-quarters (71 per cent) of organizations surveyed link base pay to performance. In 2019, “top” performers received an average increase of 4.0 per cent, compared with 2.6 per cent for “satisfactory” performers and 0.7 per cent for “poor” performers. (See Chart 3.)

Eighty-six per cent of organizations reward top performers with base pay increases that are up to twice the average increase given to satisfactory performers. Thirteen per cent reward top performance with increases between two and three times the average increase for satisfactory performance. The remaining 1 per cent of organizations reported that the average base pay increases for their top performers are more than three times those given to satisfactory performers.

3 Actual and target payouts are measured as a percentage of base pay.

Incentive payShort-term incentive plansShort-term incentive plans (STIPs) are common among Canadian organizations. Just over three-quarters (79 per cent) of survey respondents have at least one STIP in place. (See Table 5.) These plans are most prevalent in the private sector, where 91 per cent of organizations report having at least one plan in place. By comparison, just under a half of public sector organizations (46 per cent) have one or more short-term incentive plans in place. The most common STIP type is individual cash bonus or incentive plans. (See Chart 4.)

Looking at 2019 STIP payouts across employee groups, the majority of average actual payouts3 met or exceeded targets for every employee group. (See Table 6.) The percentage of eligible employees receiving payouts varies slightly by employee group, ranging from 90 per cent to 99 per cent. In 2019, the cost of short-term incentive plans averaged 11.0 per cent of total base pay spending—slightly more than the 10.5 per cent that was planned for the year.

Chart 3Average salary increase by performance group(n = 187; per cent)

Note: Sample size indicates the number of organizations providing a response for at least one performance group.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Poor performers

Satisfactory performers

Top performers

0 2 41 3 5

4.0

2.6

0.7

Chart 4Short-term incentive plan types(n = 236; per cent)*

*based on organizations that have at least one short-term incentive plan in placeSource: The Conference Board of Canada.

Gainsharing

Profit-sharing

Team-based incentive

Individual cashbonus/incentive

0 20 40 60 80 100

7

12

12

90

Short-term incentive plan definitions

Individual cash bonus plan: A plan designed to reward the accomplishment of specific results. Rewards are usually tied to expected results identified at the beginning of the performance cycle.

Team-based incentive plan: An incentive program that focuses on the performance of a group or work team.

Profit-sharing plan: A plan providing for employee participation in an organization’s profits. The plan normally includes a predetermined and defined

formula for allocating profit shares among participants and for distributing funds accumulated under the plan. However, some plans are discretionary.

Gainsharing plan: Any one of a number of incentive programs designed to share the results of productivity gains with employees as a group.

Source: WorldatWork, 2014 and 2018.

Short-term incentive plans by the numbers in 2019

have at least one plan in place.

Of these:

54% link short-term incentives to performance management results.

83% provide top performers with short-term incentive payouts that are twice that of satisfactory performers.

13% provide top performers with short-term incentive payouts that are two to three times that of satisfactory performers.

60% or more paid out at or above target across all employee groups.

11.0% is the average cost of short-term incentive plans as a percentage of total base pay spending in 2019.


79%



Table 5Prevalence of short-term incentive plans, by sector and employee group (percentage of organizations; non-unionized employees)

All organizations Only organizations with short-term incentive plans in place*

Private sector (n = 242)

Public sector (n = 84)

Overall (n = 326)



Overall (n = 258)

Overall 91 46 79 100 100 100

Senior executives 87 45 75 97 97 97

Executives 86 42 74 96 97 96

Management 87 43 75 96 92 95

Professional—technical 82 24 67 91 62 87

Professional—non-technical 80 31 68 89 73 87

Technical and skilled trades 64 10 50 74 46 72

Clerical and support 73 29 62 81 66 79

Service and production 61 7 48 70 33 67

*based on organizations that reported having a short-term incentive plan(s) in place for at least one employee groupNote: Overall prevalence of incentive plans refers only to ongoing plans.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Table 6Annual short-term incentive plan targets and payouts, by employee group (percentage of base salary, non-unionized employees)

2019 payouts* 2020 projected payouts**

nTarget payout

Actual payout

Eligible for payouts

Receiving payouts*** n

Fell short of target

Met target

Exceeded target n

Target payout

Plan maximum

Senior executives 170 45.3 52.4 99.1 96.0 151 32 18 50 152 45.7 76.2

Executives 161 31.5 34.6 98.5 96.0 142 34 13 54 142 32.8 57.2

Management 195 16.7 18.2 96.1 94.3 172 34 18 48 169 18.8 32.1

Professional—technical 151 11.3 12.8 94.2 93.1 133 34 20 47 128 14.1 24.0

Professional—non-technical 156 10.5 12.4 94.5 92.5 139 32 17 50 132 13.3 25.0

Technical and skilled trades 80 7.9 10.3 95.5 95.6 70 30 27 43 67 12.2 23.5

Clerical and support 148 6.7 8.7 96.0 92.0 132 32 24 44 127 9.6 16.3

Service and production 73 6.8 10.1 90.6 92.4 63 40 14 46 60 10.1 19.3

*2019 payouts refer to payouts based on 2018 results, paid in 2019. Sample size indicates the number of organizations providing a response for target payout for that employee group**2020 projected payouts refer to payouts based on 2019 results, to be paid in 2020. Sample size indicates the number of organizations providing a response for target payout for that employee group***based on the percentage of employees eligible in categoryNote: Totals may not add to 100 due to rounding.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



In 2020, organizations expect to spend 10.6 per cent as a percentage of total base pay spending on short-term incentive pay.

Nearly a third (29 per cent) of organizations are adjusting 2020 payout targets for at least one of their employee groups. (See Table 7.) Overall, target adjustments are expected to be greatest for employees in technical and skilled trades positions.

Targets vary widely across employee groups and industries when comparing short-term incentive pay. Senior executives and executives have the highest targets across the board. Despite the challenging operating environment over the past few years, oil and gas companies continue to set some of the highest targets overall and do so across many employee groups, revealing the importance of incentive pay for organizations in this industry. (See Table 8.)

Over half (54 per cent) of organizations with at least one short-term incentive pay plan link performance to STIP payouts. In 2019, the average short-term incentive payout for top performers was 14.2 per cent, compared with 9.3 per cent for satisfactory performers and 3.8 per cent for poor performers. (See Chart 5.) The majority (83 per cent) of these organizations provide outstanding or top performers with short-term incentive payouts that are up to twice the amount provided to satisfactory performers. Thirteen per cent provide short-term incentive payouts that are two to three times the average payout for satisfactory performance, and 4 per cent offer more than three times the typical payout to their top performers.

Medium-term incentive plansTen per cent of organizations have “medium-term” or “mid-term” pay plans that pay out after two or three years. While this type of plan continues to be less common than short- or long-term plans, they are more common in the private sector than in the public sector (13 per cent vs. 2 per cent), in line with what has been reported in recent years.

Long-term incentive plansAs with medium-term incentive plans, the prevalence of long-term incentive plans (LTIPs) remains relatively stable. Forty per cent of organizations surveyed have these plans in place, and an additional 2 per cent are considering putting them in place for the upcoming year. (See Table 9.) Once again, this figure is influenced mostly by the prevalence of LTIPs in the private sector, where half of organizations reported having LTIPs in place, compared with only 11 per cent in the public sector. Many publicly traded firms offer long-term incentives (83 per cent), as do those that are controlled by a publicly traded company (86 per cent).

Chart 5Average short-term incentive payout, by performance group(n = 110; per cent)

Note: Sample size indicates the number of organizations providing a response for at least one performance group.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Poor performers

Satisfactory performers

Top performers

0 4 8 12 16

14.2

9.3

3.8



Table 7Short-term incentive plan target adjustments, by employee group (per cent; non-unionized employees)*

Adjusting target IncreasingAverage

target increase DecreasingAverage

target decreaseOverall average

target movement**

Senior executives 19 9 15.3 10 12.8 0.8

Executives 17 8 22.4 9 8.2 5.8

Management 19 12 19.5 7 5.7 10.0

Professional—technical 16 9 35.3 8 5.0 16.1

Professional—non-technical 21 12 24.4 9 3.7 12.4

Technical and skilled trades 21 12 33.1 9 1.9 18.1

Clerical and support 23 13 24.2 10 2.1 12.4

Service and production 27 15 20.2 12 1.3 10.8

*based on organizations providing 2019 and 2020 targets**average target movements are based on data provided by organizations adjusting targetsNote: Percentage increasing and decreasing may not add to percentage adjusting target due to rounding.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Table 82020 short-term incentive plan targets for select industries, by employee group (percentage of base salary; non-unionized employees)

Construction (n = 8)

Finance (n = 28)

Insurance and real estate

(n = 18)Manufacturing

(n = 9)Oil and gas

(n = 18)

Power and utilities (n = 15)

Services— accommodation, tourism, food,

entertainment, and personal (n = 12)

Technology (n = 8)

Transportation and warehousing

(n = 10)

Senior executives 52.2 51.6 47.2 * 74.2 35.0 32.0 45.0 32.0

Executives 47.9 36.3 34.1 29.3 47.4 21.4 31.4 32.2 25.3

Management 20.0 22.1 18.2 15.3 27.9 13.0 21.9 16.4 15.2

Professional—technical 12.9 16.4 16.3 8.7 20.3 11.7 24.4 11.0 10.9

Professional—non-technical 8.5 15.2 16.4 6.7 19.7 10.2 24.4 10.2 11.0

Technical and skilled trades * 7.0 21.6 * 16.7 * * * 9.8

Clerical and support 4.4 10.8 11.3 5.3 14.8 6.7 21.2 6.5 7.6

Service and production * 6.2 22.3 * 10.9 * * * *

*sample size too low to reportNote: Sample size indicates the number of organizations providing a response for target payout for at least one employee group.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Long-term incentive plan definitions

Performance share plans/units (PSUs): Grants of actual shares of stock, with payment that is contingent on performance as measured against predetermined objectives over a multi-year period of time. The value paid, however, will fluctuate in line with changes in the stock price.

Restricted share units (RSUs): Represent a promise by the employer to pay the employee a set number of shares of company stock in the future upon completion of a vesting schedule. Employees are assigned a number of units that represent his or her interest in the stock.

Traditional stock options: A contractual right to purchase a specific number of shares of the company’s stock at a specified price for a specified period of time.

Long-term cash: Cash awards in which payment is contingent on performance as measured against predetermined financial or strategic objectives over a multi-year period of time.

Deferred share units (DSUs): A profit-sharing plan providing for employee participation in the profits of an organization. The funds are deferred as a qualified retirement program and are distributed in cash or in a cash/deferred combination.

Phantom share plan: A type of incentive grant in which the recipient is not issued actual shares of stock on the grant date, but receives an account credited with a certain number of hypothetical shares.

Stock grants: Plan that provides stock to employees without any cost to them—typically as either stock-appreciation grants or full-value grants.

Restricted stock: Grants of shares of a company’s stock, which are subject to restrictions on sale and risk of forfeiture until vested by continued employment.

Stock appreciation rights: Permits the optionee to receive the appreciation of fair market value over option price in stock and/or cash without providing funds to pay the option price.

Performance-contingent stock options: Grants of dollar-dominated units with a value that is contingent on performance as measured against predetermined objectives over a multi-year period of time. Actual payouts may be in cash, stock, or a combination.

Performance-accelerated stock options: A restricted stock award or grant that vests over time based on employment. However, vesting can occur at an accelerated basis if pre-set and stated performance objectives are reached.

Source: WorldatWork, 2007, 2009, and 2018.



Table 9Prevalence of long-term incentive plans, by sector and employee group (percentage of organizations; non-unionized employees)

All organizationsOnly organizations with long-term

incentive plan(s) in place* (n = 130)



Overall (n = 326)

Overall 50 11 40 100

Senior executives 52 11 41 98

Executives 46 10 36 85

Management 19 7 16 39

Professional—technical 5 1 4 11

Professional—non-technical 4 3 4 10

Technical and skilled trades 2 0 2 5

Clerical and support 2 3 2 6

Service and production 2 2 2 4

*based on organizations that reported having a long-term incentive plan(s) in place for at least one employee groupNote: Overall prevalence of incentive plans refers only to ongoing plans. For the purposes of this question, any ad hoc rewards of stock options or grants are excluded.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Table 10Long-term incentive plan eligibility and grant value of 2019 LTI awards(per cent; non-unionized employees)

n Employees eligible Employees receiving* n Average grant value**

Senior executives 90 93.9 93.5 83 113.1

Executives 73 91.6 92.6 72 65.5

Management 41 71.6 73.0 39 38.2

Professional—technical 11 62.3 71.8 9 29.8

Professional—non-technical 10 67.1 55.3 7 29.6

Other non-unionized 3 67.7 100 3 *

*based on the percentage of employees eligible in category**as a percentage of base paySource: The Conference Board of Canada.



The four most common long-term incentive plan types include performance share plans/units (PSUs) (51 per cent), restricted share units (RSUs) (39 per cent), traditional stock options (38 per cent), and long-term cash (35 per cent). (See Chart 6.) The top four plan types have remained unchanged since 2004.

In most organizations, eligibility for long-term incentives continues to reside primarily among the senior executive and executive ranks. The average grant value of long-term incentives for senior executives is 113.1 per cent of base salary (up from 101.3 per cent last year). Executives can expect a grant value of 65.5 per cent of base pay. (See Table 10.)

Distribution of direct compensationBase pay generally represents the most significant component of total direct compensation, particularly in the public sector. The proportion of compensation represented by short-, medium-, and long-term incentives remains relatively steady, compared with the past two years. (See Chart 7.)

In an effort to account for regional differences in the cost of living, some organizations adjust their rates of pay based on the area in which their employees operate. Twenty per cent of responding organizations use regional rates of pay. Similar to last year, the highest rates of pay were reported in the capitals of the territories and Western Canada, particularly in Fort McMurray, Edmonton, and Calgary. (See Chart 8.) There has been little change in recent years in the average rates of pay for the regions surveyed.

Chart 6Long-term incentive plan types(n = 114; per cent)*

*based on organizations that have at least one long-term incentive plan in placeSource: The Conference Board of Canada.

Performance-acceleratedstock options

Performance-contingentstock options

Stock appreciation rights

Restricted stock

Stock grants

Phantom share plan/phantom rights

Deferred share units (DSUs)

Long-term cash

Traditional stock options

Restricted share units (RSUs)

Performance share plan/units (PSUs)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

1

1

2

3

3

4

10

35

38

39

51



Chart 7Distribution of total direct compensation, by sector*(percentage of total direct compensation)

*refers to the desired distribution of total direct compensation components based on the design of the total direct compensation strategyNote: Direct compensation can be defined as all compensation that is paid directly to the employee through base salary and incentives. Totals may not add to 100 due to rounding.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Senior executives (n = 67)

Executives (n = 59)

Management (n = 66)

Professional (n = 65)

0

20

40

60

80

100 87

17

0 4

89

15

0 3

93

100 1

95

60 0

Short-term incentives

Public sector

Private sector

Base pay

Long-term incentives

Medium-term incentives

0

20

40

60

80

100

58

23

7

24

67

21

416

83

142 6

88

101 1

Senior executives (n = 157)

Executives (n = 147)

Management (n = 177)

Professional (n = 174)

Chart 8Regional compensation levels(Toronto index = 100)

Note: Regional pay data for Iqualuit were removed due to small sample size.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

60 80 100 120 140

Whitehorse (n = 9)

Yellowknife (n = 10)

Vancouver (n = 40)

Calgary (n = 47)

Edmonton (n = 39)

Fort McMurray (n = 25)

Regina (n = 29)

Saskatoon (n = 29)

Winnipeg (n = 35)

Ottawa (n = 39)

Montréal (n = 41)

Moncton (n = 30)

Halifax (n = 35)

Charlottetown (n = 18)

St. John’s (n = 26)

90102

124

90104

134

90101

120

85103

130

92102

120

90103

120

85

85

98120

12098

80 10094

85 11098

88 105 98

75 9590

75 10091

82 9590

70 10090

Section 2

Collective bargaining

Compensation Planning Outlook 2020Collective bargaining


Key findings

• The average wage increase negotiated among unionized employees for 2020 is projected to be 1.9 per cent. The average negotiated increase for 2019 was also 1.9 per cent.

• Just under a third (30 per cent) of respondents have short-term incentive pay plans for their unionized employees. Unionized employees in these organizations received payouts averaging 5.8 per cent of base pay in 2019.

• Wages remain the key bargaining issue for both management and unions.

Wage increasesFor unionized employees, average negotiated wage increases for 2020 are expected to be 1.9 per cent. (See Table 11.) Unionized employees in the public sector can expect base wage increases averaging 1.8 per cent, compared with 1.9 per cent in the private sector.

The average negotiated wage increase in 2019 was also 1.9 per cent, with the bulk of organizations providing increases between 2 and 3 per cent. (See Chart 9.) Negotiated increases in the public sector were 1.8 per cent, compared with 2.0 per cent in the private sector.

Organizations were asked to provide overall salary increases (as a percentage of base) for unionized employees (including negotiated increases, in-range adjustments, merit, step progression, etc.). The overall increase for unionized employees in 2019 averaged 2.2 per cent and is projected to be the same (2.2 per cent) in 2020. The public sector reported an increase for 2019 (2.0 per cent) that is slightly lower than what it anticipates for 2020

(2.1 per cent). The private sector’s 2020 projected average increase of 2.4 per cent is equivalent to actual increases of 2.4 per cent provided in 2019.

Chart 9Base wage increase distribution(percentage of organizations; unionized employees)


5.0 or more

4.0−4.99

3.0−3.99

2.0−2.99

1.0−1.99

.01−.99

2020 projected (n = 63)

2019 actual (n = 72)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

30

3538

6062

10

00

10



Short-term incentive payNearly one-third of unionized organizations (30 per cent) have at least one short-term incentive pay plan in place for unionized employees. These plans are more common in the private sector, where 42 per cent have a plan in place, compared with 11 per cent of public sector organizations. The majority of plans (68 per cent) exceeded or met payout targets in 2019. Almost all eligible employees (89.4 per cent) received a payout, averaging 5.8 per cent, compared with targets of 5.1 per cent. (See Table 12.) Target payouts for 2020 are expected to average 5.4 per cent.

Negotiation issuesThe majority (64 per cent) of unionized organizations believe work stoppages to be unlikely in 2020, and only one organization believes that a work stoppage “will definitely occur.” Just over half (52 per cent) of

organizations surveyed rated the overall union–management climate in their organization as cooperative, with a further 9 per cent rating the climate as “very cooperative.” The majority (74 per cent) of organizations anticipate that the relationship with their union counterparts will remain the same in the next one to two years.

Table 11Average base wage increases; unionized employees*(per cent)

Average no. of years in contract

(n = 75)Year 1—2019

(n = 72)Year 2—2020

(n = 72)Year 3—2021

(n = 65)Year 4—2022

(n = 40)Year 5—2023

(n = 17)

Contracts negotiated since Jan 1, 2019 3.5 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0

Contracts to be negotiated before Dec 31, 2020 3.5 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9

*base wage increase is the rate for the year specified (includes any cost of living allowance increases)Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Table 12Short-term incentive pay plan payouts; unionized employees(per cent)

2019 payouts (actual, based on 2018 performance) Per cent

Target payout* (n = 36) 5.1

Actual payout* (n = 32) 5.8

% of eligible employees receiving (n = 34) 89.4

% of organizations falling short of target (n = 31) 32.0

% of organizations meeting target (n = 31) 23.0

% of organizations surpassing target (n = 31) 45.0

2020 payouts (projected, based on 2019 performance)

Target payout* (n = 30) 5.4

Plan maximum* (n = 29) 8.5

*as a percentage of base paySource: The Conference Board of Canada.

Compensation Planning Outlook 2020Collective bargaining


In recent contract negotiations, most union members (93 per cent) successfully ratified the contract that was accepted by union representatives. The average percentage of union members voting in favour of the contract was 81 per cent. That said, 20 per cent of organizations have, at some point, negotiated at least one contract that the union membership failed to ratify.

The leading issue for the year ahead—on both sides of the negotiation table—continues to be wages. (See Table 13.) Flexible work practices, business competitiveness, and productivity are also top of mind for management. In line with recent years, employment security and health benefits are still expected to be top of mind for unions.

Table 13Top negotiation issues(percentage of unionized organizations)

Management issues (n = 135) Per cent Union issues (n = 138) Per cent

Wages 58 Wages 83

Flexible work practices 34 Employment security 51

Business competitiveness 33 Health benefits 38

Productivity 31 Employment and pay equity 28

Organizational change 27 Outsourcing and contracting out 22

Outsourcing and contracting out 26 Flexible work practices 16

Health benefits 23 Pensions 15

Employment and pay equity 16 Organizational change 14

Technological change 14 Technological change 7

Training and skills development 10 Training and skills development 6

Note: Respondents were provided a list and asked to indicate the top three negotiation issues for both management and union. Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Section 3

Human capital and talent trends

Compensation Planning Outlook 2020Human capital and talent trends


Key findings

• Sixty-two per cent of organizations are having difficulty recruiting and/or retaining talent, similar to what organizations reported last year (64 per cent).

• Voluntary turnover rates are up compared with last year, at a national average of 8.9 per cent.

• The overall absence rate for the most recent 12 months averaged 7.0 days per employee. Government organizations continue to show the highest rates, with an average of 8.8 days.

Rewards strategies and prioritiesSimilar to the last four years, the top three rewards priorities for organizations over the next 12 to 18 months are:

1. Maintaining a competitive position.2. Reviewing strategy and ensuring alignment

with business objectives.3. Retaining talent.

Nearly half (49 per cent) of responding organizations reported that a top rewards priority over the near term is maintaining a competitive position. (See Table 14.) Similar to last year, reviewing strategy and ensuring alignment with business objectives, and retaining and attracting talent remain key areas of focus.

Table 14Top rewards activities and priorities*(n = 321; percentage of organizations)

Next 12 to 18 months Per cent

Maintaining a competitive position 49

Reviewing strategy and ensuring alignment with business objectives

34

Retaining talent 33

Attracting talent 32

Connecting pay and performance 26

Pay equity 15

Performance management 15

Ensuring internal equity 13

Managing benefit costs 12

Communicating rewards to employees 12

*respondents were asked to select (from a list) their top rewards activities/priorities over the next 12 to 18 months. Only the top 10 responses are shown.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



Managing performanceMost Canadian organizations continue to use some kind of performance management system across all groups of non-unionized employees. The majority of surveyed organizations use a performance rating system, whether the rating is formally discussed with employees or not, across all groups of non-unionized employees. (See Table 15.)

Specifically, 74 per cent of organizations have a rating system in place for senior executives and executives, 81 per cent use a rating system for management employees, and 81 per cent reported using ratings when evaluating non-management, non-unionized employees. In contrast, for unionized employees, rating systems are used by only 46 per cent of organizations—either in formal discussions or for administrative purposes.

Among organizations with a rating system in place, 53 per cent currently employ the five-level system. (See Chart 10.) Other commonly used rating systems include three or four levels. While all rating systems have fluctuated in

popularity over the years, the five-level system has remained the most common among Canadian organizations.

The distribution of ratings within each system has remained fairly consistent over the past few years, skewed to a larger proportion of employees rated at the top level(s) than at the

Chart 10Number of performance levels(n = 273; percentage of organizations)


20

2053

7

Four-level

Three-level

Five-level

Other

Table 15Approach to performance management(percentage of organizations)

n

Employees are given a performance rating

in performance discussions

Do not use ratings in performance

discussions with employees, but they

are rated

Do not use ratings, but do have

performance discussions

Do not have any type of performance management system

Senior executives / executives 309 67 7 22 4

Management 324 75 6 18 2

Non-management, non-unionized 324 74 7 18 2

Unionized 156 40 6 32 22




bottom level(s). (See Chart 11.) Few organizations (10 per cent) force a distribution, opting instead for a recommended distribution (41 per cent) to guide managers in order to ensure normally distributed performance ratings. (See Chart 12.)

As employee performance management moves away from the traditional annual review model, organizations are beginning to incorporate an ongoing touchpoint approach in which employees are given feedback on a more regular basis.

Chart 11Performance distribution, by level(percentage of employees)

Note: 1 = the lowest level of performance and the highest number = the highest level of performance.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

0

20

40

60

80

6

69

25

Three-level (n = 41)

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

0

20

40

60

80

2

23

57

18

Four-level (n = 40)

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

0

20

40

60

80

2 7

60

26

5

Five-level (n = 128)

Chart 12Performance management practices(percentage of organizations)


Recommended distribution

Forced distribution

Forced ranking

360-degree feedback

Peer feedback

Frequent informal performance check-ins

Frequent formal performance check-ins

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

61 12 27

78 11 11

30 20 50

33 23 44

7 5 88

10 5 85

41 6 53

Currently in place Not in place but considering Not in place; no plans for future use



Overall, 86 per cent of organizations have incorporated frequent check-ins into their performance management program, either formally or informally. Nearly two-thirds (61 per cent) have formal performance check-ins; 78 per cent conduct check-ins informally.

Recruitment and retentionAt 62 per cent, the percentage of organizations having difficulty recruiting and/or retaining particular skills is similar to last year (64 per cent). (See charts 13 and 14.) Recruitment and retention challenges are being felt both in the private and the public sectors, where 61 per cent and 64 per cent, respectively, reported difficulties. (See Table 16.)

1 Kusisto, “Young People Don't Want Construction Jobs."

2 Fields, Uppal, and LaRochelle-Coté, “The Impact of Aging on Labour Market Participation Rates."

3 Conference Board of Canada, The, Provincial Outlook Economic Forecast: Summer 2019.

Organizations in the construction industry are experiencing some of the greatest difficulties recruiting and/or retaining employees, with 90 per cent of surveyed organizations saying they are having trouble in this area. With an aging workforce and fewer young people entering the labour market, especially in this industry,1 this trend is poised to continue.2 Challenges are less common in the pharmaceutical and chemical products industry.

Regionally, Ontario is experiencing the most difficulty recruiting and/or retaining. This is not surprising given the high rate of job vacancies, rapid wage acceleration, and low unemployment rate in the province, all of which suggest a tightening labour market.3 Having become a magnet for migrants relocating to this country, Atlantic Canada is having less trouble recruiting and retaining employees.

Chart 13Difficulty recruiting and retaining particular skills(n = 325; percentage of organizations)


28

2

31

39

Retaining only

Recruiting only

Recruiting and retaining

No diculty

Chart 14Difficulty recruiting and retaining particular skills—trend over time(percentage of organizations)


2014–15(n = 367)

2015–16 (n = 376)

2016–17 (n = 324)

2017–18 (n = 366)

2018–19 (n = 325)

0

20

40

60

80

59 58 5764 62



Similar to previous years, specializations in IT are in highest demand, up from 33 per cent five years ago to 57 per cent in 2019. (See Table 17.) Management continues to occupy the second spot at 26 per cent, followed by skilled trades, engineering, and accounting/finance positions.

TurnoverVoluntary turnover rates have increased from 8.1 per cent in 2018 to 8.9 per cent this year. (See Chart 15.) The private sector continues to face higher rates of voluntary turnover (10.2 per cent), compared with 4.7 per cent in the public sector. Both rates are up (although only marginally in the public sector) from last year, when the private sector reported an average voluntary turnover rate of 9.1 per cent and the public sector a rate of 4.6 per cent.

Table 17Top professions/specializations/position types in demand(n = 202; percentage of organizations)*

Next 12 to 18 months Per cent

IT/technology 57

Management 26

Skilled trades 23

Engineering (electrical, mechanical, etc.) 22

Accounting/finance 19

Sales and marketing 15

Service 13

Human resources 10

Health 6

Transportation/heavy equipment 5

Manufacturing 4

*based on organizations reporting difficulty recruiting and/or retaining particular skillsNote: respondents were asked to select (from a list) their top three professions/specializations/position types.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Table 16Difficulty recruiting or retaining particular skills, by sector, industry, and region(percentage of organizations)

n Per cent

Overall 325 62

SECTOR

Private sector 241 61

Public sector 84 64

INDUSTRY

Communications, telecommunications, and media

10 60

Construction 10 90

Education 11 55

Finance 41 71

Food, beverage, and tobacco products 6 67

Government 33 67

Health 9 89

Insurance and real estate 23 70

Manufacturing 16 75

Mining, forestry, and agriculture 12 58

Not-for-profit 26 50

Oil and gas 22 32

Pharmaceutical and chemical products 7 29

Power and utilities 19 32

Retail trade 11 46

Services—accommodation, tourism, food, entertainment, and personal

17 88

Services—professional, scientific, and technical 20 55

Technology 11 46

Transportation and warehousing 15 73

Wholesale trade 6 100

REGION

Newfoundland and Labrador 37 16

Prince Edward Island 23 13

Nova Scotia 55 22

New Brunswick 40 23

Quebec 100 48

Ontario 194 54

Manitoba 77 30

Saskatchewan 79 35

Alberta 144 35

British Columbia 133 47

Northern Canada 20 35




The retail trade industry continues to face the highest voluntary turnover rates, at 30.5 per cent in 2019. (See Table 18.) Also experiencing higher-than-average voluntary turnover are organizations in construction (15.3 per cent), professional services (13.4 per cent), and wholesale trade (13.2 per cent). Similar to last year, voluntary turnover was lowest in the power and utilities industry (3.8 per cent).

Organizations with operations in Newfoundland and Labrador are experiencing some of the highest voluntary turnover rates. This seems to be due, at least in part, to higher job creation in the province.4 Northern Canada is also seeing higher turnover rates (13.8 per cent), while organizations in Nova Scotia are experiencing low voluntary turnover (5.7 per cent). (See Table 18.)

4 Ibid.

As would be expected, voluntary turnover is lowest among employees in senior executive (2.6 per cent) and executive positions (2.4 per cent), and highest in service and production (9.7 per cent). (See Table 19.)

Employers were also surveyed on their involuntary turnover rates—defined as exits from the organization initiated by the employer (severances, dismissals, etc.). This year’s overall involuntary turnover rate is 4.2 per cent. (See Chart 16.) In 2019, the private sector reported a higher rate of involuntary turnover (5.0 per cent) than the public sector (1.7 per cent). The highest rates were reported in the construction (12.1 per cent) and retail trade (9.5 per cent) industries. (See Table 18.)

Chart 16Involuntary turnover rates—trend over time*(per cent)

*refer to Table 18 for definitions Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

0

2

4

6

8

10

5.4 5.74.4 4.0 4.2

2014–15(n = 291)

2015–16(n = 315)

2016–17(n = 261)

2017–18(n = 300)

2018–19(n = 212)

Chart 15Voluntary turnover rates—trend over time*(per cent)

*refer to Table 18 for definitions Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

2014–15(n = 306)

2015–16(n = 331)

2016–17(n = 267)

2017–18(n = 304)

2018–19(n = 227)

0

2

4

6

8

10

7.6 7.87.1

8.18.9



Table 18Voluntary and involuntary turnover rates, by sector, industry, and region(per cent)

Voluntary turnover rate Involuntary turnover rate

n % n %

Overall 227 8.9 212 4.2

SECTOR

Private sector 172 10.2 163 5.0

Public sector 55 4.7 49 1.7

INDUSTRY

Communications, telecommunications, and media 7 7.0 6 5.8

Construction 8 15.3 8 12.1

Finance 31 8.9 27 2.9

Government 22 4.3 19 1.0

Health 5 7.3 5 1.6

Insurance and real estate 18 8.7 17 3.6

Manufacturing 8 7.1 7 4.4

Mining, forestry, and agriculture 9 8.4 8 5.0

Not-for-profit 20 8.6 21 4.6

Oil and gas 18 5.4 18 4.8

Pharmaceutical and chemical products 5 10.6 * *

Power and utilities 13 3.8 13 2.6

Retail trade 9 30.5 9 9.5

Services–accommodation, tourism, food, entertainment, and personal 12 12.3 12 5.1

Services–professional, scientific, and technical 10 13.4 10 5.3

Technology 9 6.2 7 2.1

Transportation and warehousing 12 4.8 10 1.9

Wholesale trade 5 13.2 5 5.1

REGION

Newfoundland and Labrador 18 10.8 18 2.8

Prince Edward Island 9 8.3 9 3.8

Nova Scotia 28 5.7 27 3.3

New Brunswick 24 7.0 24 2.4

Quebec 35 9.6 36 5.5

Ontario 108 7.9 110 4.6

Manitoba 37 6.2 36 4.6

Saskatchewan 39 8.5 37 5.3

Alberta 74 7.6 71 4.2

British Columbia 63 9.9 61 6.3

Northern Canada 12 13.8 12 4.9

DefinitionsVoluntary turnover: Turnover that is due to an employee-initiated departure. Sometimes referred to as avoidable or regrettable turnover. Excludes retirements, dismissals, severances, redundancies, transfers, deaths, and leaves (e.g., disability, parental, sabbatical, and other leaves of absence).Involuntary turnover: An employee departure that is initiated by the employer (e.g., severances, dismissals, redundancies).Employee turnover: Determined by first calculating the average number of employees during a one-year period (add headcount for each month in the year/12), excluding casual, contract, temporary, or seasonal workers. Second, calculate the annual turnover rate (total number of exits/average number of employees during a one-year period) 100.*sample size too low to reportNote: Only industries with sufficient sample size are shown. Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



Many organizations conduct exit interviews to gather information on why employees decide to leave. The majority of organizations surveyed (79 per cent) track the reasons employees provided for voluntary turnover, either formally or informally. (See Chart 17.) Lack of progression (65 per cent), personal reasons (62 per cent), and compensation (55 per cent) were the most commonly cited reasons for voluntary employee departures. (See Table 20.)

RetirementWith the population aging, employers are losing talent each year due to retirements. The overall retirement rate for the last 12 months was 2.4 per cent, up 0.5 percentage points from last year’s rate. (See Table 21.) The overall retirement rate is the same for both the private and public sectors (2.4 per cent)—a deviation from what we typically see, which is a higher rate in the public sector. (See Table 22.) Projecting forward, organizations are expecting 3.0 per cent of employees to retire over the next 12 months. Similar to last year, estimated retirement rates within the next 12 months are highest in the wholesale trade (6.2 per cent) and transportation and warehousing (5.2 per cent) industries.

Chart 17Tracking reasons for voluntary turnover(n = 325; percentage of organizations)


40

39

21

Tracked informally

Tracked formally

Do not track

Table 19Voluntary and involuntary turnover rates, by employee group(per cent)

Voluntary turnover rates

Involuntary turnover rates

n % n %

Senior executives 115 2.6 110 3.5

Executives 96 2.4 96 3.7

Management 127 4.3 132 3.1

Professional—technical 112 5.7 108 3.3

Professional—non-technical 120 7.5 117 3.1

Technical and skilled trades 72 5.3 72 2.8

Clerical and support 123 7.8 125 4.1

Service and production 75 9.7 71 4.3

Sales 47 5.8 49 3.9


Table 20Top reasons for voluntary turnover*(n = 213; percentage of organizations)

Per cent

Lack of progression 65

Personal reasons 62

Compensation 55

Poor relationship with manager 24

Lack of learning and development opportunities 23

Stress related to job 13

Commute 10

Work not rewarding 8

Lack of recognition 5

Toxic work environment 3

Lack of confidence in senior leadership 3

*based on organizations that track reasons for voluntary turnoverNote: Respondents were asked to select (from a list) the top three reasons employees provided for leaving the organization.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



Table 21Retirement rates—trend over time(per cent)

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Have retired in the past 12 months 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.4

Expect to retire in the next 12 months 2.7 2.6 2.9 2.4 3.0


Table 22Retirement rates, by sector and industry(per cent)

nHave retired in the

past 12 monthsExpected to retire in the next 12 months

Overall 226 2.4 3.0

SECTOR

Private sector 158 2.4 2.8

Public sector 68 2.4 3.3

INDUSTRY

Communications, telecommunications, and media 6 3.1 3.9

Construction 6 2.9 0.7

Education 8 2.2 2.1

Finance 30 2.6 2.9

Government 28 2.7 3.5

Health 6 4.2 4.1

Insurance and real estate 18 1.8 2.9

Manufacturing 10 2.9 3.8

Mining, forestry, and agriculture 8 3.0 3.0

Not-for-profit 21 2.1 1.9

Oil and gas 18 1.8 2.2

Pharmaceutical and chemical products 5 1.7 1.4

Power and utilities 15 3.3 4.5

Retail trade 7 2.3 2.8

Services—accommodation, food, entertainment, personal 12 1.2 2.3

Services—professional, scientific, and technical 8 2.6 1.3

Technology 7 2.2 1.6

Transportation and warehousing 10 2.9 5.2

Wholesale trade 6 2.5 6.2

*sample size too low to reportNote: Sample sizes reflect the number of organizations that provided a retirement rate for the past 12 months. Only industries with sufficient sample size are shown.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.



Employee absencesThe overall absence rate for the most recent 12 months among surveyed organizations was 7.0 days per employee, up from 6.7 days per employee last year. (See Chart 18.) Rates are higher in the public sector (8.8 days) than in the private sector (6.3 days). Government organizations had the highest absence rate at 8.8 days per employee. (See Table 23.)

Chart 18Absence rates—trend over time*(days per employee)

*refer to Table 23 for definition Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

0

2

4

6

8

10

6.5 6.4 6.6 6.7 7.0

2014–15(n = 140)

2015–16(n = 139)

2016–17(n = 111)

2017–18(n = 117)

2018–19(n = 102)

Table 23Absence rates, by sector and industry(days per employee)

n Days per employee

Overall 102 7.0

SECTOR

Private sector 72 6.3

Public sector 30 8.8

INDUSTRY

Finance 21 6.4

Government 11 8.8

Insurance and real estate 10 7.0

Manufacturing 5 5.4

Not-for-profit 14 6.7

Power and utilities 9 7.6

DefinitionWork absences: Absences (with or without pay) of an employee from work due to his or her own illness, disability, or personal or family responsibility, for a period of at least half a day but less than 52 consecutive weeks. Excludes maternity, adoption, paternity and parental leaves, vacation and holidays, bereavement leave, and jury duty.Note: Only industries with sufficient sample size are shown.Source: The Conference Board of Canada.

Appendices

Appendix A | The Conference Board of Canada


Appendix A

Glossary

Employee group definitionsSenior executives: All executives reporting directly to the CEO.

Executives: All other executives.

Management: Senior and middle management who plan, develop, and implement policies and programs.

Professional—technical: Engineers, information technology specialists, developers, etc.

Professional—non-technical: All other professionals, such as accountants, lawyers, doctors, excluding sales.

Technical and skilled trades: Technologists, technicians, millwrights, etc.

Clerical and support: Administrative staff, clerks, coordinators, assistants, etc.

Service and production: Employees providing service, production, maintenance, transportation, etc.

Base pay increase definitionsRange increase: Percentage increase to salary ranges (salary structure) among organizations with ranges (often associated with increase to cost of living or economic adjustment).

Percentage of employees receiving an increase: Percentage of employees receiving a base salary increase, as a percentage of all employees in category.

Average salary increase for those receiving one: The total percentage increase to base salary from all sources—range, merit, economic, and progression (excluding increases due to promotions). Does not include employees receiving a zero per cent increase.

Average salary increase among all employees: The total percentage increase to base salary from all sources—range, merit, economic, and progression (excluding increases due to promotions). Includes employees receiving a zero per cent increase.

Average base salary: The average annual base salary in dollars after the increases have been applied.


Appendix B

Respondent profile

Table 1Respondent profile(total number of responding organizations = 326)

Percentage of organizations

INDUSTRY

Communications, telecommunications, and media 3

Construction 3

Education 3

Finance 13

Food, beverage, and tobacco products 2

Government 10

Health 3

Insurance and real estate 7

Manufacturing 5

Mining, forestry, and agriculture 4

Not-for-profit 8

Oil and gas 7

Pharmaceutical and chemical products 2

Power and utilities 6

Retail trade 3

Services—accommodation, tourism, food, entertainment, and personal 5

Services—professional, scientific, technical 6

Technology 3

Transportation and warehousing 5

Wholesale trade 2

SECTOR

Private sector 74

Public sector 26

(continued ...)


Appendix B | The Conference Board of Canada

Table 1 (cont’d)Respondent profile(total number of responding organizations = 326)

Percentage of organizations

OPERATIONS

Canadian only 66

North American 13

Global 22

OWNERSHIP

Publicly traded 20

Controlled by Canadian publicly traded company 4

Controlled by foreign publicly traded company 7

Privately held 25

Not applicable 43

MAJORITY WORKFORCE

Atlantic provinces 4

Quebec 7

Ontario 48

Manitoba 4

Saskatchewan 6

Alberta 21

British Columbia 10

Northern Canada 0.3

ASSETS (CANADIAN OPERATIONS)

$0–$99 million 17

$100–$999 million 20

$1 billion and over 37

Not reported 26

ANNUAL SALES/SERVICE REVENUE (CANADIAN OPERATIONS)

$0–$99 million 22

$100–$999 million 31

$1 billion and over 30

Not reported 17

NUMBER OF FTE EMPLOYEES

Fewer than 500 34

500–1,499 22

1,500–4,999 26

5,000 and over 19

Total number of FTE employees 1,485,336

Total non-unionized employees 707,766

Total unionized employees 762,654



Appendix C

Participating organizations

A total of 326 organizations participated in the Compensation Planning Outlook 2020 Survey. The following participating organizations have authorized the publication of their name.

A&W Food Services of Canada Inc.

A. Raymond Tinnerman Manufacturing Hamilton, Inc.

ABB Inc.

Access Credit Union

Accessible Media Inc.

Admare BioInnovations

Aimia Inc.

Air Canada

Alamos Gold Inc.

Alberta Health Services

Alberta Innovates

Alberta Investment Management Corporation

Alberta Medical Association

Alberta Milk

Alberta Utilities Commission

Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc.

Algonquin College of Applied Arts and Technology

Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.

Allstate Insurance Company of Canada

AltaGas Ltd.

ARC Resources Ltd.

ATB Financial

ATCO Ltd.

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

Bank of Canada

BASF Canada Inc.

Bayer Inc.

BC Hydro and Power Authority

BC Pension Corporation

BDO Canada LLP

Bell Canada

BlueShore Financial Credit Union

BMO Financial Group

BP Canada Energy Group ULC

British Columbia Automobile Association

British Columbia Investment Management Corporation

British Columbia Lottery Corporation

Brookefield Residential Properties Inc.

Business Development Bank of Canada

BWXT Canada Ltd.

CAA South Central Ontario

Calfrac Well Services Ltd.

Calgary Co-operative Association Limited

Cameco Corporation


Appendix C | The Conference Board of Canada

Canada Lands Company CLC Limited

Canada Post Corporation

Canadian Blood Services

Canadian Dental Association

Canadian Foodgrains Bank Association Inc.

Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement

Canadian Institute for Health Information

Canadian International Grains Institute

Canadian Medical Association

Canadian Medical Protective Association

Canadian National Railway Company

Canadian Pacific Railway Company

Canlan Ice Sports

Capgemini

Capital Power Corporation

CapitalCare Group Inc.

CBC/Radio-Canada

Celero Solutions

Celestica Inc.

CGI Group Inc.

CI Financial

City of Brandon

City of Burnaby

City of Calgary

City of Edmonton

City of Greater Sudbury

City of Lethbridge

City of Markham

City of Mississauga

City of Ottawa

City of Regina

City of Richmond

City of Saskatoon

CLE Capital Inc.

CNOOC Petroleum North America ULC

Cogeco Communications Inc.

College of Nurses of Ontario

Colliers Project Leaders

Comox Valley Regional District

Conestoga Meat Packers Ltd.

Corix Group of Companies

Cornerstone Credit Union

Covenant House Vancouver

Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation

Crombie REIT

CSA Group

CSL Silicones Inc.

Cunningham Swan LLP

dentalcorp Canada

Dentons Canada LLP

District of Mission

Domtar Corporation

Dynacare

Economical Insurance Group

Edmonton Economic Development Corporation

EfficiencyOne

Emera Inc.

Empire Life Insurance Company

Enbridge Inc.

Enerflex Ltd.

Enmax Corporation

Enns Brothers Ltd.

EPCOR Utilities Inc.

Ericsson Canada Inc.

Export Development Canada

Farm Credit Canada

Federated Co-operatives Limited

Fidelity Investments Canada Limited

Finning International Inc.

FortisAlberta Inc.

FortisBC Energy Inc.

GE Canada

GEF Seniors Housing

General Dynamics Land Systems–Canada

Gibson Energy Inc.

Golder Associates Ltd.

Government of New Brunswick

Graham Management Services LP


Great Canadian Gaming Corporation

Group Medical Services

Halifax Port Authority

Halifax Regional Municipality

Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan

Heritage Park

Hewlett Packard Enterprise Canada

Holstein Canada

Houle Electric Ltd.

Husky Energy Inc.

Hydro-Québec

IA Financial Group

IBM Corporation

Independent Electricity System Operator

Independent Order of Foresters

Indigo Books & Music Inc.

Infrastructure Ontario

Insurance Corporation of British Columbia

Intact Financial Corporation

Interior Health Authority

Interior Savings Credit Union

Ivanhoé Cambridge Inc.

J.D. Irving Ltd.

K+S Potash Canada

Kal Tire Ltd.

Keyera Energy Inc.

KPMG Canada

La Capitale assurance et services financiers

Lafarge Canada Inc.

Lakeland Credit Union

Law Society of British Columbia

Law Society of Ontario

Ledcor Group of Companies

LifeLabs LP

Magna International Inc.

Maple Leaf Foods Inc.

Marriott Hotels of Canada Ltd.

McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited

McKesson Canada

McMaster University

Medical Council of Canada

MEG Energy Corp.

Mental Health Commission of Canada

Meridian Credit Union

Methanex Corporation

Metrolinx

Metro-Richelieu Inc.

Moneris Solutions Corporation

Mouvement des caisses Desjardins

Muskoka Brewery Inc.

Nalcor Energy

National Bank of Canada

National Gallery of Canada

NAV Canada

Newfoundland Power Inc.

Newmont Goldcorp Red Lake Holdings Ltd.

North American Construction Group Ltd.

Northbridge Financial Corporation

Northview Apartment REIT

NOVA Chemicals Corporation

Nova Scotia Pension Services Corporation

NuVista Energy Ltd.

Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions

Ontario College of Pharmacists

Ontario Hospital Association

Ontario Institute for Cancer Research

Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation

Ontario Pension Board

Ontario Securities Commission

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

Ottawa International Airport Authority

Ottawa Police Service

Parkland Fuel Corporation

Parmalat Canada Inc.

PCL Constructors Inc

Pelmorex Media Inc.

PenFinancial Credit Union Ltd.

PepsiCo Canada


Appendix C | The Conference Board of Canada

Pet Valu Canada Inc.

PETRONAS Energy Canada Ltd.

Plains Midstream Canada ULC

Ports Toronto

Princess Auto Ltd.

Purdue Pharma Canada

Purolator Inc.

PwC Management Services LP

Qualico Developments Canada Ltd.

Queen’s University

RC Pets

RCM Technologies Canada Corp.

Red River College

Regional Municipality of Halton

Regional Municipality of Niagara

Regional Municipality of Peel

Regional Municipality of York

Retail Council of Canada

Richardson International Limited

Richards-Wilcox Canada

Rocky Mountaineer

Rogers Communications Inc.

Russel Metals Inc.

Safran Landing Systems Canada Inc.

Samsung Electronics Limited

Samuel, Son & Co., Limited

Sanofi-aventis Canada Inc.

Saskatchewan Blue Cross

Saskatchewan Government Insurance

Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority

SaskPower

Savanna Energy Services Corp.

Science World British Columbia

Scotiabank

Seaspan ULC

Servus Credit Union

Shell Canada Ltd.

SickKids Hospital

Silvera for Seniors

Sleep Country Canada

Société de transport de Montréal

Sodexo Canada Ltd.

Sonoco Canada Corporation

Southern Alberta Institute of Technology

St. Joseph’s Health Care Hamilton

StandardAero

Staples Canada

STEP Energy Services Ltd.

Strathcona County

Strathcona Paper

Suncor Energy Inc.

Symcor Inc.

Tarion Warranty Corporation

TC Energy Corporation

TCU Financial Group

TD Bank Group

Teck Resources Limited

Teranet Inc.

Terrapure Environmental

The Beer Store

The Calgary Stampede

The Chartered Professional Accountants of British Columbia

The Commonwell Mutual Insurance Group

The Equitable Life Insurance Company of Canada

The Great-West Life Insurance Company

The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada

The St Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation

TMX Group Ltd.

Toronto Hydro Electric System Ltd.

Toronto Transit Commission

Torys LLP

Town of Banff

Town of Quispamsis

Trans Mountain

TransAlta Corporation

TransLink


Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat

UAP Inc.

UNI Coopération Financière

Université de Saint-Boniface

Universities Canada

University of Ottawa

University of Regina

University of Saskatchewan

University of Waterloo

University of Winnipeg

Vale Canada Ltd.

Vancouver City Savings Credit Union

Via Rail Canada

Ville de Montréal

Viterra Inc.

Western Financial Group Inc.

Westminster Savings Credit Union

Woodbine Entertainment Group

Workers’ Compensation Board Alberta

Government of Yukon

Zurich Canada


Appendix D | The Conference Board of Canada

Appendix D

Bibliography

Conference Board of Canada, The. Canadian Outlook Executive Summary: Autumn 2019. Ottawa: CBoC, October 2019.

—. Provincial Outlook Economic Forecast: Summer 2019. Ottawa: CBoC, August 2019.

Fields, Andrew, Sharanjit Uppal, and Sébastien LaRochelle-Coté. “The Impact of Aging on Labour Market Participation Rates.” Accessed October 5, 2019. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2017. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2017001/article/14826-eng.htm.

Employment and Social Development Canada. “Major Wage Settlements by Sector and Jurisdiction.” Accessed October 5, 2019. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/collective-bargaining-data/wages/wages-jurisdiction-sector.html.

Ellig, Bruce R. “The Return of the Stock Appreciation Right: Exploring the Key Features and Benefits.” Workspan, October 31, 2009.

Kusisto, Laura. “Young People Don’t Want Construction Jobs. That’s a Problem for the Housing Market.” The Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2018. Accessed October 10, 2019. https://www.wsj.com/articles/young-people-dont-want-construction-jobs-thats-a-problem-for-the-housing-market-1533029401?ns=prod/accounts-wsj.

Statistics Canada. “Labour Force Survey, September 2019.” The Daily. Statistics Canada, October 11, 2019. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/ 191011/dq191011a-eng.htm.

WorldatWork. The WorldatWork Handbook of Compensation, Benefits & Total Rewards: A Comprehensive Guide for HR Professionals. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2007.

WorldatWork and Vivient Consulting. Incentive Pay Practices Survey: Privately Held Companies. Scottsdale, AZ: WorldatWork, 2014.

—. Incentive Pay Practices Survey: Privately Held Companies. Scottsdale, AZ: WorldatWork, 2018.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2017001/article/14826-eng.htm

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2017001/article/14826-eng.htm

https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/collective-bargaining-data/wages/wag



https://www.wsj.com/articles/young-people-dont-want-construction-jobs-thats-a-problem-for-the-housing-market-1533029401?ns=prod/accounts-wsj




https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/191011/dq191011a-eng.htm

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/191011/dq191011a-eng.htm

Publication 10487Price: $1,370

conferenceboard.ca

To cite this report: Coburn, Kelsey, and Allison Cowan. Compensation Planning Outlook 2020 Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada, 2019.

©2019 The Conference Board of Canada* Published in Canada | All rights reserved | Agreement No. 40063028 | *Incorporated as AERIC Inc.

An accessible version of this document for the visually impaired is available upon request. Accessibility Officer, The Conference Board of Canada Tel.: 613-526-3280 or 1-866-711-2262 E-mail: [email protected]

®The Conference Board of Canada is a registered trademark of The Conference Board, Inc. Forecasts and research often involve numerous assumptions and data sources, and are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties. This information is not intended as specific investment, accounting, legal, or tax advice. The findings and conclusions of this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the external reviewers, advisors, or investors. Any errors or omissions in fact or interpretation remain the sole responsibility of The Conference Board of Canada.

Where insights meet impact

Compensation Planning Outlook 2020 Kelsey Coburn and Allison Cowan

https://www.conferenceboard.ca

compensation planning outlook 2020...compensation planning outlook 2020 is the 38th edition of this...

Documents