Go to top of page

Remuneration data and analysis - Details by SES classification

This section summarises the detailed findings for Base Salary, TRP and TR for each SES classification. Mercer’s analysis of these salary aggregates presents distribution charts for the 2010 sample as compared to the 2009 sample, along with a discussion of the key characteristics of the 2010 sample. The section also includes analysis of the major benefits, including superannuation, motor vehicles and bonuses, which are reported in the section on each SES classification.

SES 1

Remuneration overview

Table s 3.1 to 3.3, and Chart 3.1, show the distribution of Base Salary, TRP and TR for SES 1 employees in 2010 compared with the results from 2009.

Table 3.1 – Base Salary Distribution and Movements for SES 1
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 1,940 $127,640 $151,942 $158,277 $167,557 $282,992 $160,972 $15,272
2009 1,690 $123,031 $144,751 $149,987 $159,442 $272,763 $153,523 $14,375
% Change 09/10 14.8% 3.7% 5.0% 5.5% 5.1% 3.8% 4.9% 6.2%
% Change 08/09 2.4% 7.9% 6.0% 5.9% 4.9% 9.0% 5.7% 7.7%
Table 3.2 – TRP Distribution and Movements for SES 1
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 1,940 $147,807 $199,272 $210,175 $220,973 $367,205 $210,459 $17,917
2009 1,690 $142,625 $193,020 $203,136 $213,509 $351,996 $203,848 $17,144
% Change 09/10 14.8% 3.6% 3.2% 3.5% 3.5% 4.3% 3.2% 4.5%
% Change 08/09 2.4% -4.5% 4.8% 3.2% 1.9% 1.7% 2.8% -12.6%
Table 3.3 – TR Distribution and Movements for SES 1
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 1,940 $147,807 $202,253 $213,017 $226,575 $405,392 $214,300 $19,221
2009 1,690 $142,625 $198,010 $207,730 $220,738 $378,432 $209,490 $18,758
% Change 09/10 14.8% 3.6% 2.1% 2.5% 2.6% 7.1% 2.3% 2.5%
% Change 08/09 2.4% -4.5% 4.1% 2.8% 1.4% -1.3% 2.3% -11.6%

Information provided in table s 3.1 to 3.3, and calculations based on this data, show that:

  • the sample size for SES 1 employees continues to increase
  • 50 per cent of employees are paid a Base Salary between $151,942 and $167,557, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $145,700 and $176,244
  • 50 per cent of employees have a TRP between $199,272 and $220,973, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $192,542 and $228,376
  • 50 per cent of employees have a TR between $202,253 and $226,575, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $195,079 and $233,521
  • the average Base Salary, TRP and TR is slightly higher than the median Base Salary, TRP and TR, indicating that a number of individuals are paid at a higher rate than the majority.

Chart 3.1* – Remuneration comparisons for SES 1 between 2009 and 2010

*All data items shown in the above chart reference the detailed summary table s in Appendix E.

Chart 3.1 indicates:

  • the Q1 to Q3 ranges (which represent 50 per cent of employees) for Base Salary, TRP and TR are in a relatively narrow band, compared to the wide variation for the 5 per cent of employees paid over the 95th percentile
  • the variation from the minimum to the 5th percentile is significantly less than the variation from the 95th percentile to the maximum. This skew in the data results in average payments for Base Salary, TRP and TR being greater than the corresponding median payments
  • for 2010, the range from the 5th percentile to the 95th percentile, which includes 90 per cent of employees (represented by the coloured cylinders), covers a range of $50,282 for Base Salary, $55,468 for TRP and $58,179 for TR. This is a slight increase for the corresponding 2009 5th to 95th percentile ranges across all remuneration aggregates.

Major benefits

Superannuation

Table 3.4 shows the distribution and movement of superannuation contributions for SES 1 employees.

Table 3.4 – Superannuation Distribution and Movements for SES 1
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 $12,576 $23,768 $26,671 $31,361 $79,915 $28,075 $6,573
2009 $12,036 $22,806 $25,383 $29,827 $58,683 $27,142 $6,419
% Change 09/10 4.5% 4.2% 5.1% 5.1% 36.2% 3.4% 2.4%
% Change 08/09 -6.8% 10.1% 8.1% -21.7% -18.5% -4.3% -33.8%

Table 3.4 shows that for SES 1 the 2010 median superannuation contributions have increased by 5.1 per cent.

Table 3.5 shows superannuation contributions as a proportion of Base Salary for SES 1 employees in 2010 and 2009. These proportions are generally higher than Mercer observes for other industry groups, due to the majority of SES 1 employees being members of CSS or PSS funds.

Table 3.5 – Superannuation as a Proportion of Base Salary for SES 1
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average
2010 9.0% 15.3% 16.3% 19.2% 50.7% 17.5%
2009 8.5% 15.2% 16.4% 19.1% 37.4% 17.7%

There are still a number of cases where the employee is receiving a relatively high superannuation contribution as a percentage of their Base Salary. This may be due to an employee having a higher salary for superannuation purposes than their Base Salary as at 31 December 2010. This could be because they received a higher salary at a previous stage in their career, or have a package that provides for superannuation to be contributed on a higher salary than their actual Base Salary.

Table 3.6 provides a summary of salary for superannuation purposes as a percentage of Base Salary across the total SES 1 sample by superannuation fund membership. The table indicates the proportion of SES 1 employees within each ‘Percentage of Base Salary’ range. The table s show that 32 per cent of the sample use the CSS fund and 60 per cent use the PSS fund.

Table 3.6 – Salary for Superannuation as a Percentage of Base Salary, sorted by Fund for SES 1 Employees in 2010
Fund n Percentage of Base Salary (as at 31 December 2010) used as ‘Base Salary’ for superannuation calculation purposes
<70% 70-79% 80-89% 90-99% 100-109% 110-119% 120-129% 130+%
AGEST 12 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 16.7% 75.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
CSS 615 0.0% 0.8% 8.1% 33.3% 50.2% 5.9% 1.5% 0.2%
PSS 1,160 0.4% 2.0% 10.2% 35.8% 47.1% 4.0% 0.4% 0.2%
PSSAP 119 0.8% 3.4% 6.7% 31.9% 53.8% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0%
Other 34 2.9% 0.0% 2.9% 14.7% 76.5% 2.9% 0.0% 0.0%

As can be seen from Table 3.6, the majority of SES 1 employees have a salary for superannuation purposes within ±10 per cent of Base Salary, skewed towards the plus

10 per cent category. This is consistent with the overall findings across the SES levels.

Motor vehicles

Table 3.7 presents the distribution of motor vehicle costs, including FBT, for SES 1 employees for 2010 and 2009. These costs include all leasing and running costs, but exclude other related costs such as parking. Note that the costs refer to the cost to an employee’s package, either calculated by applying Mercer’s Car Formula (refer to Appendix C) or using the agency’s identified vehicle budget. Please refer to Section 2 for information on car parking costs.

Table 3.7 – Distribution of Motor Vehicle Costs* in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1
Band Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
SES 1 2010 $10,911 $24,000 $25,186 $28,000 $50,173 $25,803 $5,421 21%
SES 1 2009 $12,896 $23,000 $24,393 $26,000 $56,194 $24,698 $4,050 33%

*Includes FBT

Table 3.7 shows that:

  • one fifth of SES 1 employees have a motor vehicle as part of their remuneration package, a clear reduction from the proportion in 2009
  • the minimum values of $10,911 seem quite low; however, these values may reflect ‘part private use’ or ‘restricted private use’. Where the full value of the vehicle to the employee is calculated using Mercer’s Car Formula, the otherwise unrestricted value is discounted for the limited usage by the employee
  • the average and median motor vehicle cost has increased slightly from 2009 to 2010, most likely due to ongoing increases in the cost of fuel, maintenance and car insurance.

Table 3.8 presents the distribution of cash payments provided in lieu of motor vehicles for SES 1 employees for 2010 and 2009.

Table 3.8 – Cash in Lieu of Motor Vehicle in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1
Band Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
SES 1 2010 $649 $22,000 $24,553 $25,186 $30,358 $24,079 $2,278 59%
SES 1 2009 $5,647 $22,282 $24,393 $25,000 $28,590 $23,762 $2,098 56%

Table 3.8 shows that:

  • as with motor vehicle costs (Table 3.7), there is an increase in cash payment at both the median and the average from 2009 to 2010
  • the proportion of SES 1 employees choosing to take cash in lieu of a motor vehicle has increased.

Combining the information from Table s 3.7 and 3.8, it is noted that 80 per cent of SES 1 employees receive a vehicle benefit (or cash in lieu), slightly less than the proportion seen in 2009. The data suggests that cash in lieu of a motor vehicle continues to be the preferred option for receiving motor vehicle benefits in 2010.

Other benefits

Table 3.9 shows the distribution of payments made for other benefits in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1 employees. For 96 per cent of SES 1 employees, no other benefits were received, a slight increase from the 94 per cent of SES 1 employees not receiving other benefits in 2009.

Table 3.9 – Distribution of Payments for Other Benefits in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $1,087 $1,405 $2,231 $4,330 $22,500 $3,756 $3,919 4%
2009 $1,014 $1,350 $1,930 $4,191 $38,575 $5,045 $7,676 6%

Bonuses

Performance bonuses

Under half of SES 1 employees (42 per cent) were eligible for performance bonus payments in 2010, quite a decrease from the 56 per cent of eligible employees in 2009. Of those eligible, 92 per cent of SES 1 employees actually received a bonus payment (a small increase from the 91 per cent in 2009).

Table 3.10 shows performance bonus payments for SES 1 employees in 2010 and 2009, along with percentage differences from 2009 to 2010 and from 2008 to 2009. Note that the data included in table 3.10 includes those employees who were eligible but did not receive a performance bonus payment (i.e. data reported as $0).

Table 3.10 – Performance Bonus Payment Distribution and Movements for SES 1
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $0 $2,985 $7,972 $13,452 $38,187 $8,860 $5,992 42%
2009 $0 $6,361 $8,955 $14,185 $33,250 $9,842 $5,780 56%
% Change 09/10 - -53.1% -11.0% -5.2% 14.8% -10.0% 3.7% -25.0%
% Change 08/09 - 19.4% 11.9% 6.7% -10.7% 12.0% 6.0% -20.0%

Table 3.10 shows that the median and average actual performance bonus payments for SES 1 have decreased from 2009.

Table 3.11 shows performance bonus payments received as a proportion of Base Salary and TRP for SES 1 employees over the past three years. The data includes only those employees eligible for performance bonuses.

Table 3.11 – Average Performance Bonuses as a Percentage of Base Salary and TRP from 2008 to 2010
Band Average Bonuses as % of Base Salary Average Bonuses as % of TRP
2008 2009 2010 2008 2009 2010
SES 1 6.1% 6.4% 5.5% 4.4% 4.8% 4.2%

Table 3.11 shows that performance bonus amounts for 2010, as a percentage of Base Salary and TRP, have decreased slightly from both 2008 and 2009.

Retention bonuses

Special payments are made to some SES employees as a means of retaining these employees for an identified period of time, such as for the duration of a project.

Only 2 per cent of SES 1 employees were eligible for retention bonuses in 2010, marginally higher than the proportion eligible in 2009. Whilst just under 60 per cent of SES 1 employees eligible for retention bonuses actually received a payment, the average retention bonus payment was approximately $2,000 less than in 2009. For a few individuals these payments were quite significant, with the maximum payment being $30,000, however this was a significant decrease from the maximum value in 2009 ($60,000).

Table 3.12 shows the distribution of retention bonuses to eligible employees in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1 employees.

Table 3.12 – Distribution of Actual Retention Bonuses to Eligible Employees in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $0 $0 $1,000 $3,990 $30,000 $4,189 $7,394 2%
2009 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $60,000 $6,190 $12,637 1%

Other bonus payments

Only 2 per cent of SES 1 employees received other bonus payments in 2010, indicating that these payments are not a typical feature of SES remuneration. table 3.13 below shows that other bonus payments to SES 1 employees ranged from a minimum of $650 to a maximum of $5,000. The median payment is $900 and the average is $1,130.

Table 3.13 – Distribution of Other Bonus Payments to Eligible Employees in 2010 and 2009 for SES 1
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $650 $900 $900 $900 $5,000 $1,130 $963 2%
2009 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0%

Typical package breakdown

Chart 3.2 and 3.3 illustrate the typical package breakdown (on an overall basis) of TR for SES 1 employees in 2010 and 2009. Note that the motor vehicle component of the breakdown includes the car value, car parking and any car allowances. The bonuses component includes all actual performance, retention and other bonuses.

Chart 3.2 – Typical Breakdown of TR in 2010 for SES 1

Chart 3.3 – Typical Breakdown of TR in 2009 for SES 1

SES 2

Remuneration overview

Table s 3.14 to 3.16 and Chart 3.4, show the distribution of Base Salary, TRP and TR for SES 2 employees in 2010 compared with the results from 2009.

Table 3.14 – Base Salary Distribution and Movements for SES 2
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 547 $164,230 $188,602 $200,726 $215,913 $483,945 $205,288 $25,015
2009 483 $147,300 $182,896 $189,633 $201,676 $278,512 $193,448 $18,456
% Change 09/10 13.3% 11.5% 3.1% 5.8% 7.1% 73.8% 6.1% 35.5%
% Change 08/09 3.2% 25.8% 5.8% 6.4% 5.2% 3.0% 6.0% 6.9%
Table 3.15 – TRP Distribution and Movements for SES 2
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 547 $193,242 $247,872 $262,680 $276,280 $509,268 $264,364 $26,275
2009 483 $168,518 $241,339 $254,222 $266,457 $357,630 $254,577 $22,049
% Change 09/10 13.3% 14.7% 2.7% 3.3% 3.7% 42.4% 3.8% 19.2%
% Change 08/09 3.2% -2.0% 4.2% 2.5% 0.4% -6.0% 1.8% -18.0%
Table 3.16 – TR Distribution and Movements for SES 2
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 547 $193,242 $251,732 $266,763 $283,265 $857,318 $269,862 $37,753
2009 483 $189,059 $249,075 $263,461 $275,198 $392,630 $262,850 $23,332
% Change 09/10 13.3% 2.2% 1.1% 1.3% 2.9% 118.4% 2.7% 61.8%
% Change 08/09 3.2% 10.0% 3.1% 2.3% 0.1% -3.0% 1.5% -19.8%

Information provided in table s 3.14 to 3.16, and calculations based on this data, show that:

  • the sample size for SES 2 employees continues to increase
  • 50 per cent of employees are paid a Base Salary between $188,602 and $215,913, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $180,273 and $230,303
  • the average Base Salary, TRP and TR figures are slightly higher than the median for all aggregates, indicating that a small number of individuals are paid significantly higher than the majority
  • 50 per cent of employees have a TRP between $247,872 and $276,280, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $238,089 and $290,639
  • 50 per cent of employees have a TR between $251,732 and $283,265, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $232,109 and $307,615
  • the median and average Base Salary, TRP and TR amounts are higher than those reported for 2009.

Chart 3.4* – Remuneration Comparisons for SES 2 between 2009 and 2010


*All data items shown in the above chart reference the detailed summary table s in Appendix E.

Chart 3.4 shows that:

  • the Q1 to Q3 ranges (which represent 50 per cent of employees) for Base Salary, TRP and TR are in a relatively narrow band compared to the wide variation for the 5 per cent of employees paid over the 95th percentile
  • the variation from the minimum to the 5th percentile is less than the variation from the 95th percentile to the maximum. This results in SES 2 average payments for Base Salary, TRP and TR being greater than the corresponding median payments
  • for 2010, the range from the 5th percentile to the 95th percentile which includes 90 per cent of employees (represented by the coloured cylinders), covers a range of $65,037 for Base Salary, $73,534 for TRP and $78,361 for TR. These ranges have increased from the corresponding values in 2009.

Major benefits

Superannuation

Table 3.17 shows the distribution and movement of superannuation contributions for SES 2 employees.

Table 3.17 – Superannuation Distribution and Movements for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 $0 $30,439 $35,731 $41,806 $69,023 $37,060 $9,221
2009 $0 $29,202 $34,264 $40,263 $67,371 $35,815 $9,220
% Change 09/10 -- 4.2% 4.3% 3.8% 2.5% 3.5% 0.0%
% Change 08/09 -100.0% 7.2% -18.7% -19.0% -12.5% -8.6% -26.5%

Table 3.17 shows that for SES 2 both the median and average superannuation contributions have increased from the 2009 sample.

Table 3.18 shows superannuation contributions as a proportion of Base Salary for SES 2 employees. These proportions are much higher than Mercer observes for other industry groups, due to the majority of SES employees being members of CSS or PSS. Compared to 2009, the proportions for 2010 have reduced slightly.

Table 3.18 – Superannuation as a Proportion of Base Salary for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average
2010 0.0% 15.3% 17.0% 20.4% 36.7% 18.2%
2009 0.0% 15.4% 17.2% 20.9% 36.8% 18.6%

There are also a number of cases where an SES 2 employee is receiving a relatively high superannuation contribution as a percentage of their Base Salary. This may be due to an employee having a higher salary for superannuation purposes than their Base Salary as at 31 December 2010. This could be because they received a higher salary at a previous stage in their career, or have a package that provides for superannuation to be contributed on a higher salary than their actual Base Salary.

Table 3.19 provides a summary of salary for superannuation purposes as a percentage of Base Salary across the total sample of SES 2 employees, according to superannuation fund membership. The table indicates the proportion of SES 2 employees within each ‘Percentage of Base Salary’ range. The majority of SES 3 employees use either the CSS (44 per cent) or PSS funds (40 per cent).

Table 3.19 – Salary for Superannuation as a Percentage of Base Salary, sorted by Fund for SES 2 Employees in 2010
Fund n Percentage of Base Salary (as at 31 December 2010) used as ‘Base Salary’ for superannuation calculation purposes
<70% 70-79% 80-89% 90-99% 100-109% 110-119% 120-129% 130+%
AGEST 4 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 75.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
CSS 241 0.0% 2.1% 9.1% 35.7% 44.4% 6.2% 2.1% 0.4%
PSS 219 0.0% 2.7% 10.5% 39.3% 42.5% 4.1% 0.9% 0.0%
PSSAP 50 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 38.0% 56.0% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other 32 3.1% 0.0% 6.3% 12.5% 71.9% 6.3% 0.0% 0.0%

As can be seen from table 3.19, the majority of employees have a salary for superannuation purposes within ±10 per cent of their Base Salary, skewed towards the plus 10 per cent category for most funds.

Motor vehicles

Table 3.20 presents the distribution of motor vehicle costs, including FBT, for SES 2 employees for 2010 and 2009. These costs include all leasing and running costs, but exclude other related costs such as parking. Note that the costs refer to the cost to an employee’s package, either calculated by the Mercer Car Formula (refer Appendix C) or using the agency’s identified vehicle budget. Please refer to Section 2 for information on car parking costs.

Table 3.20 – Distribution of Motor Vehicle Costs* in 2010 and 2009 for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $10,239 $24,794 $26,500 $30,000 $63,697 $27,266 $6,890 31%
2009 $11,315 $23,229 $25,477 $28,764 $56,194 $26,474 $5,625 48%

*Includes FBT

Table 3.20 shows that:

  • while just under one third of SES 2 employees have a motor vehicle as part of their remuneration package, this proportion has decreased by 17 per cent from 2009
  • the minimum values of $10,239 seem quite low, however this value may reflect ‘part private use’ or ‘restricted private use’ and where the full value of the vehicle to the employee is calculated using Mercer’s Car Formula, the otherwise unrestricted value is discounted for the limited usage by the employee
  • the average and median motor vehicle cost has increased slightly from 2009 to 2010, most likely due to ongoing increases in the cost of fuel, maintenance and car insurance.

Table 3.21 presents the distribution of cash payments provided in lieu of motor vehicles for SES 2 employees for 2010 and 2009.

Table 3.21 – Cash in Lieu of Motor Vehicle in 2010 and 2009 for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $10,826 $23,728 $26,100 $26,500 $30,000 $25,369 $2,398 46%
2009 $20,000 $23,070 $25,477 $26,271 $30,000 $25,047 $2,041 42%

Table 3.21 shows that:

  • as with motor vehicle costs (table 3.20), there is a small increase in cash payment at both the median and the average from 2009 to 2010
  • the proportion of SES 2 employees choosing to take cash in lieu of a motor vehicle has also increased to 46 per cent in 2010.

Combining the information from table s 3.20 and 3.21, it can be seen that 77 per cent of SES 2 employees surveyed receive a vehicle benefit (or cash in lieu).

Other benefits

Table 3.22 details the distribution of payments made for other benefits (including FBT where applicable) in 2010 and 2009 for SES 2 employees. The proportion of employees that did not receive any other benefits has increased to 93 per cent, compared to 89 per cent of employees for the previous year.

Table 3.22 – Distribution of Payments for Other Benefits in 2010 and 2009 for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $1,000 $1,138 $1,830 $2,503 $45,000 $4,738 $9,401 7%
2009 $1,043 $1,350 $1,930 $6,628 $42,165 $6,248 $8,985 11%

Bonuses

Performance bonuses

Just over one third (37 per cent) of SES 2 employees were eligible for performance bonus payments in 2010, which is a decrease in the percentage of eligible employees reported for 2009. Of those eligible, as was the case in 2009, 92 per cent of SES 2 employees actually received a performance bonus payment.

Table 3.23 shows performance bonus payments for SES 2 employees in 2010 and 2009, along with comparisons from 2008. Note that the data included in table 3.23 includes those employees who were eligible but did not receive a performance bonus payment (i.e. data reported as $0).

Table 3.23 – Performance Bonus Payment Distribution and Movements for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $0 $3,658 $12,768 $18,956 $348,050 $14,892 $27,575 37%
2009 $0 $8,889 $14,078 $19,169 $35,000 $14,334 $7,800 56%
% Change 09/10 -- -58.8% -9.3% -1.1% 894.4% 3.9% 253.5% -33.9%
% Change 08/09 -- 8.6% 11.7% 11.6% 11.6% 12.5% 13.3% -15.2%

Table 3.23 shows that whilst median performance bonus payments have decreased from 2009, average performance bonus payments have increased. This indicates that a number of employees may have received comparably higher bonus payments in 2010.

Table 3.24 shows performance bonus payments received as a proportion of Base Salary and TRP for SES 2 employees over the past three years. The data includes only those employees eligible for performance bonuses and shows that bonus amounts, as a percentage of Base Salary and TRP, are slightly lower in 2010 than in 2009. Whilst average bonus, as a percentage of TRP, is higher in 2010 than in 2008, the reverse is true for bonuses as a percentage of base salary.

Table 3.24 – Average Performance Bonuses as a Percentage of Base Salary and TRP from 2008 to 2010
Band Average bonuses as % of Base Salary Average bonuses as % of TRP
2008 2009 2010 2008 2009 2010
SES 2 7.1% 7.6% 6.7% 5.1% 5.8% 5.2%

Retention bonuses

For SES 2 employees, consistent with last year, only 2 per cent were eligible for retention bonuses in 2010. Of those eligible for retention bonuses, 69 per cent of SES 2 employees actually received a payment, a substantial increase from the 40 per cent of SES 2 employees who received a retention bonus in 2009.

Table 3.25 shows the distribution of retention bonuses to eligible SES 2 employees in 2010 and 2009.

Table 3.25 – Distribution of Actual Retention Bonuses to Eligible Employees in 2010 and 2009 for SES 2
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $0 $0 $1,000 $1,000 $15,000 $1,732 $4,013 2%
2009 -- $0 $1,711 $16,560 -- $7,458 $11,375 2%

Other bonus payments

As only one per cent of SES 2 employees received an additional bonus payment in 2010, no data can be reported. This is consistent with 2009, where only one SES 2 employee received an additional bonus payment. 

Typical package breakdown

Charts 3.5 and 3.6 illustrate the typical breakdown (on an overall basis) of TR for SES 2 for 2010 and 2009. Note that the motor vehicle component of the breakdown includes the car value, car parking and any car allowances. The bonuses component includes all actual performance, retention and other bonuses.

Chart 3.5 – Typical Breakdown of TR in 2010 for SES 2

Chart 3.6 – Typical Breakdown of TR in 2009 for SES 2

SES 3

Remuneration overview

Table s 3.26 to 3.28 and Chart 3.7 show the distribution of Base Salary, TRP and TR for SES 3 employees in 2010 compared with the results from 2009.

Table 3.26 – Base Salary Distribution and Movements for SES 3
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 125 $214,582 $237,899 $261,910 $281,200 $590,029 $267,877 $43,128
2009 111 $215,650 $226,738 $248,000 $272,923 $566,791 $257,017 $42,524
% Change 09/10 12.6% -0.5% 4.9% 5.6% 3.0% 4.1% 4.2% 1.4%
% Change 08/09 6.7% 13.2% 6.0% 9.7% 7.3% 3.0% 7.6% 1.0%

Table 3.27 – TRP Distribution and Movements for SES 3

Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 125 $270,704 $307,399 $335,335 $358,351 $669,936 $338,619 $46,212
2009 111 $263,631 $312,103 $325,125 $343,225 $664,184 $332,704 $47,101
% Change 09/10 12.6% 2.7% -1.5% 3.1% 4.4% 0.9% 1.8% -1.9%
% Change 08/09 6.7% 8.2% 3.9% 3.2% 2.3% 2.8% 2.9% -1.7%
Table 3.28 – TR Distribution and Movements for SES 3
Year n Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 125 $270,704 $313,282 $340,627 $365,145 $669,936 $344,946 $47,641
2009 111 $264,286 $315,886 $336,029 $352,526 $746,058 $342,648 $51,504
% Change 09/10 12.6% 2.4% -0.8% 1.4% 3.6% -10.2% 0.7% -7.5%
% Change 08/09 6.7% 2.3% 1.5% 1.7% 1.6% 15.5% 2.7% 10.1%

Information provided in table s 3.26 to 3.28, and calculations based on this data show that:

  • the sample size for SES 3 employees continues to increase
  • 50 per cent of employees are paid a Base Salary between $237,899 and $281,200 with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $224,749 and $311,005
  • 50 per cent of employees have a TRP between $307,399 and $358,351, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $292,407 and $384,831
  • 50 per cent of employees have a TR between $313,282 and $365,145, with 68 per cent of employees being paid between $297,305 and $392,587
  • the average Base Salary, TRP and TR are higher than the median Base Salary, TRP and TR, indicating that a number of individuals are paid significantly higher than the majority
  • median 2010 values for Base Salary, TRP and TR are all greater than those reported for 2009 (ranging from ~$5,000 to ~$14,000 higher).

Chart 3.7* – Remuneration comparisons for SES 3 between 2009 and 2010


*All data items shown in the above chart reference the detailed summary tables in Appendix E.

Chart 3.7 shows that:

  • the Q1 to Q3 ranges (which represent 50 per cent of employees) for Base Salary, TRP and TR are in a relatively narrow band compared to the wide variation for the 5 per cent of employees paid over the 95th percentile
  • the variation from the minimum to the 5th percentile is significantly less than the variation from the 95th percentile to the maximum, thus average payments for Base Salary, TRP and TR are greater than the corresponding median payments
  • for 2010 the range from the 5th percentile to the 95th percentile which includes 90 per cent of employees (represented by the coloured cylinders), covers a range of $113,790 for Base Salary, $119,272 for TRP and $135,142 for TR. This represents an increase from the corresponding 2009 ranges for Base Salary and TR, and a decrease for TRP.

Major benefits

Superannuation

Table 3.29 shows the distribution and movement of superannuation contributions for SES 3 employees.

Table 3.29 – Superannuation Distribution and Movements for SES 3
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD
2010 $29,995 $41,026 $48,041 $57,225 $93,048 $50,157 $12,419
2009 $28,539 $41,046 $48,521 $59,159 $100,903 $50,516 $12,548
% Change 09/10 5.1% 0.0% -1.0% -3.3% -7.8% -0.7% -1.0%
% Change 08/09 54.0% 2.0% -14.8% -8.4% -9.9% -6.2% -17.3%

Table 3.29 shows that for SES 3 the median superannuation contributions have decreased by 1 per cent from the 2009 sample.

Table 3.30 shows superannuation contributions as a proportion of Base Salary for SES 3 employees in 2010. These proportions are higher than Mercer observes for other industry groups, due to the majority of SES employees being members of PSS or CSS. The median and average proportions for 2010 are lower than those of 2009.

Table 3.30 – Superannuation as a Proportion of Base Salary for SES 3
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average
2010 9.0% 15.4% 17.2% 21.0% 40.0% 19.0%
2009 11.2% 16.1% 18.8% 22.3% 34.2% 20.0%

There are also a number of cases where an SES 3 employee is receiving a relatively high superannuation contribution as a percentage of their Base Salary. This is because the employee has a higher salary for superannuation purposes than their Base Salary as at 31 December 2010. This may be attributed to them receiving a higher salary at a previous stage in their career (particularly for CSS and PSS members), and/or they have a package that provides for superannuation to be contributed on a higher salary than their actual Base Salary.

Table 3.31 provides a summary of salary for superannuation purposes as a percentage of Base Salary across the total sample of SES 3 employees, according to superannuation fund membership. The table indicates the proportion of SES 3 employees within each ‘Percentage of Base Salary’ range.

Table 3.31 – Salary for Superannuation as a Percentage of Base Salary, sorted by Fund for SES 3 Employees in 2010
Fund n Percentage of Base Salary (as at 31 December 2010) used as ‘Base Salary’ for superannuation calculation purposes
<70% 70-79% 80-89% 90-99% 100-109% 110-119% 120-129% 130+%
AGEST 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
CSS 67 0.0% 4.5% 13.4% 44.8% 31.3% 1.5% 1.5% 3.0%
PSS 39 0.0% 5.1% 7.7% 51.3% 30.8% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0%
PSSAP 13 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 38.5% 53.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other 4 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

As can be seen from table 3.31, the majority of SES 3 employees use the CSS fund (54 per cent) and have a salary for superannuation purposes within ±10 per cent of their Base Salary.

Motor vehicles

Table 3.32 presents the distribution of motor vehicle costs, including FBT, for SES 3 employees for 2010 and 2009. These costs include all leasing and running costs, but exclude other related costs such as parking. Note that the costs refer to the cost to an employee’s package, either calculated by the Mercer car formula (refer to Appendix C) or using the agency’s identified vehicle budget. Please refer to Section 2 for information on car parking costs.

Table 3.32 – Distribution of Motor Vehicle Costs* in 2010 and 2009 for SES 3
Band Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
SES 3 2010 $13,014 $25,000 $27,005 $32,000 $44,675 $27,295 $6,247 28%
SES 3 2009 $19,072 $23,199 $25,956 $30,201 $34,110 $26,507 $3,861 50%

*Includes FBT

Table 3.32 shows that:

  • less than one third of SES 3 employees have a motor vehicle as part of their remuneration package, a significant reduction from 50 per cent in 2009
  • the average and median motor vehicle costs are slightly higher than the 2009 levels, possibly reflecting increases in fuel prices and vehicle running costs.

Table 3.33 presents the distribution of cash payments provided in lieu of motor vehicles for SES 3 employees for 2010 and 2009.

Table 3.33 – Cash in Lieu of Motor Vehicle in 2010 and 2009 for SES 3
Band Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
SES 3 2010 $18,118 $25,000 $27,902 $30,000 $30,650 $26,923 $2,756 43%
SES 3 2009 $20,504 $25,000 $25,956 $29,000 $30,650 $26,791 $2,595 35%

Table 3.33 shows that:

  • as with motor vehicle costs (table 3.32), the average and median motor vehicle costs are slightly higher than 2009 levels
  • the proportion of SES 3 employees choosing to take cash in lieu of a motor vehicle has increased by 8 per cent.

From the information in both table s 3.32 and 3.33, it can be seen that 71 per cent of SES 3 employees in 2010 received a vehicle benefit (or cash in lieu) down from 85 per cent in 2009.

Other benefits

Table 3.34 details the distribution of payments made for other benefits in 2010 and 2009 for SES 3 employees. Only 2 per cent of SES 3 employees received some other benefit. With such a small number, a sizable reduction from the proportion that received other benefits in 2009, relevant and statistical values could not be reported.

Table 3.34 – Distribution of Payments for Other Benefits in 2010 and 2009 for SES 3
Band Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
SES 3 2010 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2%
SES 3 2009 $1,098 $1,350 $1,930 $26,000 $51,029 $11,389 $15,654 14%

Bonuses

Performance bonuses

Just over one third of SES 3 employees were eligible for performance bonus payments in 2010, a decrease from the 50 per cent of eligible employees in 2009. Of those eligible, 84 per cent of SES 3 employees actually received a bonus payment.

Table 3.35 shows performance bonus payments for SES 3 employees in 2010 and 2009, along with change comparisons from 2008. Note that the data included in table 3.35 includes those employees who were eligible but did not receive a performance bonus payment (i.e. data reported as $0).

Table 3.35 – Performance Bonus Payment Distribution and Movements for SES 3
Year Minimum Q1 Median Q3 Maximum Average SD % Rep
2010 $0 $4,523 $7,000 $24,879 $35,810 $13,907 $11,522 34%
2009 $0 $10,000 $20,114 $25,000 $81,874 $19,524 $14,379 50%
% Change 09/10 -- -54.8% -65.2% -0.5% -56.3% -28.8% -19.9% -32.0%
% Change 08/09 -- 12.4% 29.2% 8.6% 108.9% 21.6% 59.3% -20.6%

Table 3.35 shows that:

  • both the median and average performance bonus payments for SES 3 have decreased since 2009
  • eligibility in 2010 is lower than in 2009.

Table 3.36 shows average performance bonus payments received as a proportion of Base Salary and TRP for SES 3 employees over the past three years. The data includes only those employees eligible for performance bonuses.

Table 3.36 – Average Performance Bonuses as a Percentage of Base Salary and TRP from 2008 to 2010
Band Average Bonuses as % of Base Salary Average Bonuses as % of TRP
2008 2009 2010 2008 2009 2010
SES 3 7.1% 7.5% 5.4% 5.1% 5.7% 4.3%

Table 3.36 shows that performance bonus amounts, as a percentage of Base Salary and TRP, have decreased from both 2008 and 2009.

Retention bonuses

Only 4 per cent of SES 3 employees were eligible for retention bonuses in 2010, which is slightly higher than the 3 per cent eligible in 2009. For the 4 per cent of SES 3 employees eligible for a retention bonus in 2010, the average payment was $38,200, a significant increase from the average bonus amount of $10,000 in 2009.

Other bonus payments

As only 2 per cent of agencies actually paid other bonuses to SES 3 employees, no statistics have been calculated to protect confidentiality.

Typical package breakdown

Charts 3.8 and 3.9 illustrate the typical breakdown of TR (on an overall basis) for SES 3 for 2010 and 2009. Note that the motor vehicle component of the breakdown includes the car value, car parking and any car allowances. The bonuses component includes all actual performance, retention and other bonuses.

Chart 3.8 – Typical Breakdown of TR in 2010 for SES 3

Chart 3.9 – Typical Breakdown of TR in 2009 for SES 3

Remuneration movements by agency

In relation to the sample size for 2010, there have been increases in the number of records across SES 1 (an additional 250 records or 12.9 per cent), SES 2 (an additional 64 records or 11.7 per cent), and SES 3 (an additional 14 records or 11.2 per cent).

An analysis of the TRP movements within each agency from 2009 to 2010 is shown in table 3.37. In creating table 3.37, each agency’s median TRP increase in percentage terms from 2009 to 2010 was calculated, and agencies were then grouped according to the magnitude of their increase.

Table 3.37 – Distribution of TRP Increases from 2009 to 2010 by Agency
Band Movement of the Median from 2009 to 2010
<0 0% to <5% 5% to ≤10% >10% Total Number
SES 1 6 27 15 8 56
SES 2 5 14 12 6 37
SES 3 8 6 8 5 27

At SES 1, 33 of the 56 agencies recorded median TRP movement which was either negative or less than 5 per cent. Fifteen agencies recorded median movements in the range 5 per cent to 10 per cent and eight agencies recorded median TRP movements higher than 10 per cent. In looking at those agencies which had the larger increases, no clear pattern emerges. For SES 1, the 23 agencies that had TRP increases above 5 per cent were a mixture of small, medium and large sized agencies

At SES 2, six agencies (16.2 per cent) had median TRP movements higher than 10 per cent, more than the 11 per cent in 2009. In addition, another 12 agencies had median TRP movements between 5 per cent and 10 per cent. These 18 agencies were again a mixture of small, medium and large sized agencies. Five agencies had negative TRP median movements, less than the nine agencies with negative movements for 2009.

At SES 3, 14 agencies had TRP median movements which were either negative or below 5 per cent, while 13 agencies had TRP median movements greater than 5 per cent. Of these 13 agencies, five increased TRP by more than 10 per cent, a slight increase on the four agencies above 10 per cent in 2009. Similar to trends noted for the other SES classifications, of the 13 agencies that had median TRP increases of 5 per cent or more, there was a mixture of small, medium and large agencies.