State of Arizona workforce report: 2003 |
Previous | 1 of 14 | Next |
|
|
Small
Medium
Large
Extra Large
Full-size
Full-size archival image
|
This page
All
|
State of Arizona Janet Napolitano Governor of Arizona Betsey Bayless Director, Department of Administration Arizona Department of Administration HUMAN RESOURCES SYSTEM 2003 ANNUAL REPORT BETSEY BAYLESS DIRECTOR ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION 100 NORTH FIFTEENTH AVENUE, SUITE 401 PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007 PHONE (602) 542-1500 FAX (602) 542-2199 September, 2003 The Honorable Janet Napolitano Governor, State of Arizona The Honorable Ken Bennett President, Arizona State Senate The Honorable Franklin “Jake” Flake Speaker, Arizona House of Representatives 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Dear Governor Napolitano, President Bennett and Speaker Flake: It is my pleasure to share with you the 2003 Annual Report on the Arizona State Service Human Resources System. The format of this year’s report is very similar to that produced last year, providing you with meaningful data regarding the status of the State’s workforce and the operation of the State Human Resources System. We remain restricted in our ability to thoroughly analyze data of the workforce due to the inherent limitations of our current payroll/personnel system. However, we are anxiously looking forward to the new Human Resources Information Solution scheduled to be unveiled in January, 2004. We expect this new system will facilitate the collection and analysis of accurate and timely data for future reports and will assist us to be even more effective and efficient in managing our human resources. This report was prepared in the midst of a sluggish economic situation and severe financial constraints upon agency budgets, and an uncertainty as to when, and to what extent, the economy will recover. The State of Arizona is facing a serious challenge with less money available but a higher demand for state services. The state workforce is shrinking, state salaries continue to be significantly below the market, and 43% of the workforce has four years or less of experience. This is just a glimpse of the information that indicates the difficulty we are facing in attracting and retaining employees. We are hopeful that the information in this report will assist you when making your decisions regarding Arizona State government and its employees. Very truly yours, Betsey Bayless Director i Table of Contents Section and Title Page Number Table of Contents i Overview ii SECTION ONE – OVERVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCE OPERATIONS 1 State Human Resources Operations Profile 2 SECTION TWO – GENERAL EMPLOYMENT TRENDS 6 Table 1 Filled Salaried and Wage Positions 1997 – 2003 7 Table 2 Filled Salaried and Wage Positions by Agency 2001, 2002, and 2003 8 Table 3 Covered/Uncovered Filled Positions by Agency 2003 9 Table 4 Rank Order of All States by Ratio of State Employment to State Population 2000 10 Table 5 Ratio of All State Employment to State Population 2000 11 Table 6 Rank Order of All States by Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 12 Table 7 Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 13 SECTION THREE – EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 14 Table 8 Distribution of State Government Employees by Ethnic Group 2003 15 Table 9 Distribution of State Government Employees by Occupational Group 2003 16 Table 10 Changes in Salaried Employment by Race and Gender 1997 – 2003 17 Table 11 Changes in Salaried Employment of Minorities 1997 - 2003 17 Table 12 Minority Representation by Agency – Salaried Employees 2003 18 Table 13 Gender Representation by Agency – Salaried Employees 2002 19 SECTION FOUR – EMPLOYEE MOBILITY 20 Table 14 Changes in Separations by Wage & Salaried Employees 1997 - 2003 21 Table 15 Separation Rates of Covered, Salaried Employees by Agency 1997 - 2003 22 Table 16 Separations of Covered, Salaried Employees by Type by Agency 2003 23 Table 17 Most Populous Class Titles 2003 24 Table 18 Classes With The Highest Separation Rate 2003 24 SECTION FIVE – EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS 25 Table 19 Agency Comparison of Average Wages per Employee 1997 - 2002 26 Table 20 Total Overtime Costs by Agency 2001 – 2003 27 Table 21 Distribution of Overtime Costs by Agency 2003 28 Table 22 Average Sick Leave Use and Costs Per Employee by Agency 1997 - 2002 29 Table 23 Age Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 30 Table 24 Length of Service Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 31 Table 25 Employee Survey 1999 - 2002 32 Table 26 State Employees by County 2003 33 ii Overview Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) §41-763.01 requires the Director of the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) to provide a report to the Governor and the Legislature on the status of the state’s human resources and the operation of the state human resources system. The statute requires that the report include information on the following: • All state employees including employees of all executive, legislative and judicial branch agencies. • The number of employees affected by and reasons for turnover within state service. • Overtime pay requirements of all state agencies. • Other information as determined by the Director. In Arizona State government the majority of agencies are subject to the jurisdiction of the ADOA Human Resources System. However, there are 23 agencies that are not included in this System. These 23 agencies have been informally grouped into 11 separate human resources systems. Each system develops its own employment, compensation, attendance and leave, and employee relations policies and procedures. Table A identifies all of the human resources systems within Arizona State Government and the number of employees within each of these systems. Agency Appropriated Full-Time Equivalent Positions ADOA Human Resources System 31,127.7 Governor's Office Personnel System Governor's Office N/A Governor's Office of Equal Opportunity 19.0 Governor's Office of Strategic Planning & Budgeting 24.0 Board of Regents & Universities Personnel System Board of Regents 29.4 Arizona State University 6,977.5 Northern Arizona University 2,269.3 University of Arizona 6,239.1 Legislative Personnel System Auditor General's Office 228.0 House of Representatives 231.0* Joint Legislative Budget Committee 35.0 Legislative Council 54.0 Library & Archives 129.1 Senate 200.0* Community College Board Personnel System 13.0 Courts Personnel System Court of Appeals 140.5 Superior Court 199.0 Supreme Court 253.9 Department of Gaming Personnel System 75.0 Governmental Information Technology Agency Personnel System 21.0 Department of Public Safety Personnel System Law Enforcement Merit System Council 1.0 Public Safety, Department of 1,912.8 Public Safety Personnel Retirement System N/A Arizona Schools for the Deaf and Blind 623.4 State Compensation Fund 485.0* Office of Tourism 28.0 Source: Joint Legislative Budget Committee – Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriations Report. Numbers reflect FY03 appropriations. Items marked with an asterisk indicate that numbers of employees were solicited from the respective agency. The largest of the human resources systems within Arizona State Government is the ADOA Human Resources System, also known as the Arizona State Service. The ADOA Human Resources System and the Law Enforcement Merit System Council (the Department of Public Safety’s personnel system) are the State’s only merit systems established by statute. Merit system employees may only be separated from service for cause. Non-merit employees of the other systems serve at the pleasure of the appointing authorities and can be separated without the right of appeal. They are considered “at will” employees. The primary focus of this report is the ADOA Human Resources System. The report is comprised of five sections. Table A iii Section One provides an overview of the ADOA Human Resources Operations. The responsibility of the ADOA Human Resources Operations resides with the ADOA, Human Resources Division located at 100 North 15th Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. This section describes who receives services provided by the ADOA Human Resources Division, the services provided, the organization of the division, and functional highlights. Section Two provides demographic information of the employees within the ADOA Human Resources System. The demographic information includes filled salaried and wage positions, covered and uncovered filled positions by agency, state employment in relation to state population, and total state payroll in relation to state population. Section Three provides statistical information of the employees within the ADOA Human Resources System by race, gender and ethnic group. The statistical information includes distribution of employees by ethnic group compared to the Arizona Labor Force, distribution of employees by occupational group, trends in salaried employment by race and gender, trends in salaried employment of minorities, minority representation by agency of salaried employees, and gender representation by agency of salaried employees. Section Four provides data on the mobility patterns of the employees within the ADOA Human Resources System. The data in this Section includes the trends in the separations (turnover) by wage and salaried employees, trends in the separations of covered, salaried employees by agency, separations by reason by agency, most populous classes and the classes with the highest separation rates. Section Five provides information on employment characteristics. The majority of the information is presented by agency with five years of historical data. This section includes average covered employee wage, total overtime costs by agency, distribution of overtime costs by agency, average sick leave use and costs per employee, distribution of average age of employees, distribution of average length of service of employees, employee satisfaction survey results, and percentage of employees by county. The main source of the information presented in Sections Two through Five is the state’s Human Resources Management System (HRMS). This is a decentralized record-keeping and tracking database, and the accuracy of the data in the system is dependent upon the personnel in each of the state agencies to enter information into the system in a timely manner. Maintenance and reporting functions of the system reside within the authority of ADOA. The HRMS system captures information from roughly 100 different agencies, boards, and commissions that are included within the ADOA Human Resources System. Many of these organizations are quite small in size. For many of the tables contained herein, organizations with less than 50 allocated positions (at the end of fiscal year 2002) have been consolidated into one line item at the top of the table, noted as “small agencies”. In addition, the charts represent filled positions as of the date referenced when the reports were generated. Tables do not include vacant positions. Section One State Human Resources Operations Profile ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS State Human Resources Operations Profile The largest government human resources system in Arizona is managed by the Arizona Department of Administration, Human Resources Division. Established: 1968 as the Arizona Personnel Commission Location: 100 North 15th Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona Employees: 153.5 full-time positions Budget for FY 2004: $14,943,600 (ProRata), $5,362,212 (Health Insurance Trust Fund) Mission: …provide efficient, timely customer-driven professional human resources services… The Division consists of six functional areas: Benefits, Classification and Compensation, Employment, Satellite Offices/Employee Relations, Planning and Quality Assurance, and Consulting Services. Human Resources Director - Kathy Peckardt Benefits/Insurance - Susan Strickler, Manager Classification/Compensation - Joanne Carew, Manager Employment - Linda Herold, Manager Satellite Offices/Employee Relations - Laura Krause, Manager Planning and Quality Assurance – Greg Carmichael, Manager Human Resources Consulting – Denny Flaherty, Marie Isaacson, Claudia Smith, Clarence Williams Customer Base includes over 9,000 retirees and over 62,000 active employees from 100 state agencies, boards and commissions and 3 state universities. • Health and welfare agencies (e.g. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Economic Security, Health Services) • Protection and safety agencies (e.g. Adult and Juvenile Corrections) • Transportation agencies (e.g. Department of Transportation) • Inspection and regulation agencies (e.g. Board of Accountancy, Real Estate, Insurance and Medical Examiners) • Education agencies (e.g. Department of Education, State Universities1, Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind) • Natural resource agencies (e.g. Game and Fish, State Land, State Parks) • General government agencies (e.g. Revenue, Commerce) • State retirees1 Summary of Services • A benefits program is offered that includes medical, dental, vision, basic and supplemental life insurance, dependent life insurance, flexible spending accounts, short-term and long-term disability for active, benefit-eligible employees. • An on-site childcare center located on the capitol mall is available to state employees. • An Employee Assistance Program is available that offers counseling services and referral services. • Wellness Program is available that offers: o Health Education classes tailored to each individual worksite. o Free or low-cost screening programs. o An inter-agency wellness resource center with books, videos and audiotapes. o A monthly newsletter full of wellness information and a listing of upcoming events in worksites statewide. • Human resources professionals are located on-site within the eight largest state agencies. • A team of human resources professionals is dedicated solely to serving the 92 small and mid-sized agencies, to take advantage of economies of scale. • A centralized database of applicants is maintained for hiring supervisors to utilize to fill positions. • A pool of candidates is maintained to fill the temporary staffing needs of state agencies. • The recruitment strategy includes a variety of methods including coordinating and hosting job fairs and community events and participating in community outreach programs. • An up-to-date website www.hr.state.az.us is available containing information relating to job opportunities and employee benefits. • Consulting services are offered to provide human resources expertise in such areas as employment law and Arizona State government rules, policies and practices. • Market surveys are conducted annually and outside salary surveys are utilized to evaluate market position of state jobs to ensure external competitiveness. • Jobs are analyzed and evaluated to determine appropriate salary ranges and job classifications to ensure internal equity. 1 These customers utilize the services of the Benefits Program only. 3 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS An example of the Arizona Healthways newsletter Benefits The Benefits section fulfills the statutory responsibility to provide health and welfare benefits to the State of Arizona employees, retirees, long-term disability recipients, COBRA participants and their eligible dependents. The “Saguaro Program” brand was selected to identify the ADOA benefits from other benefit programs offered to employees and retirees within the state of Arizona. The Saguaro Program is comprehensive and consists of medical, dental, vision, basic life, supplemental life, dependent life, short-term disability, long-term disability, and flexible spending accounts. Although recent comparisons have not been conducted, a 1998 study by Watson & Wyatt indicated that the State’s employee benefits were competitive with other large Arizona employers. The table below provides a breakdown of the enrollment for each of the program components for the October 2002 through September 2003 plan year. Benefit Enrollment The Benefits section also offers a Wellness Program. The Wellness Program provides services at no or low cost in order to improve the health and wellness of our employees. This program is available for employees and families who work for the State of Arizona. Retirees of the State of Arizona (and their spouses) are also welcome to use wellness resources. The program includes publishing a health newsletter Arizona Healthways, workshops/training, a library of materials, flu shots, and mammography, osteoporosis, and stroke risk assessment screenings. As we move forward into the future, wellness will become a vital function to educate and promote preventative measures to reduce health care claims costs. Diabetes screening, disease prevention classes, and disease management will be necessary to incorporate into the wellness program. The following table provides data regarding the number of services provided for the past three years. Wellness Data Another component of the Benefits section includes the Employee Assistance Program (EAP). EAP offers counseling services, referral services and management/employee workshops. The types of workshops offered include EAP Service Introductions and Crisis Debriefing. The table below provides information for the past two years regarding the number and types of issues where intervention was provided. EAP Services Service 2001 2002 2003 Phone Contacts 5,301 3,681 3,980 Referrals 3,690 3,183 3,412 Counseled 634 553 586 Substance Abuse 101 58 92 Psychological 74 38 40 Physical/Medial 38 27 19 Legal 49 38 24 Work Related 168 182 201 Financial 92 84 50 Marriage/Family 112 126 160 In-Service/Crisis Sessions 42 65 72 Represented Agencies 350 385 320 Plan Enrollment Percent Basic Life 61,527 100% Medical 52,766 85.8% Dental 53,106 86.3% Vision 42,408 68.9% Short-Term Disability 25,102 40.8% Long-Term Disability 57,220 93% Supplemental Life 30,359 49.3% Dependent Life 31,167 50.7% Medical FSA* 3,840 6.2% Dependent FSA* 719 1.2% * Flexible Spending Accounts do not include university employees Service 2000 2001 2002 2003 Classes/Screenings 935 1,324 1,360 1,316 Employees Attending 35,007 41,840 42,205 42,229 Flu Shots Administered 12,799 14,147 15,421 14,564 Flu Shot Worksites 229 282 306 307 WeightWatchers Sessions 111 135 137 48 Employees Attending 3,045 3,828 4,080 3,489 Pounds Lost 18,978 23,339 23,689 19,296 Mammography Screenings 370 546 631 815 Referred to doctor 28 44 59 45 Osteoporosis Screenings 630 734 666 700 Abnormal 173 194 149 122 4 Source of Resumes 5,041 4,847 11,834 4,936 4,085 3,988 3,487 15,235 11,800 9,111 5,685 3,139 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY03 Internet Newspapers Mail/Other Classification & Compensation The Classification/Compensation section administers job evaluations and compensation programs for the ADOA Human Resources System while maintaining internal and external equity. In addition, this section conducts and/or participates in salary benefit studies, evaluates covered and uncovered positions using the whole job classification method, determines FLSA designation for all positions, prepares the annual salary recommendation, and administers and interprets salary policy. The number of positions that were established or reclassified declined this past year, while the number that were abolished continued to increase. The increasing number of abolishment of positions is in large part the result of a “clean up” of data necessary for the conversion to a new personnel system, the Human Resources Information Solution (HRIS). Number of Classification Actions 948 1,426 868 1,771 1,751 764 964 1,713 1,986 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 FY 01 FY 02 FY03 Established Reclassified Abolished Employment The Employment Section maintains a centralized applicant database, provides training and conducts informational sessions for agency staffing professionals, manages community outreach, coordinates/hosts job fairs and community events, manages turnover data and manages temporary services. The following graphic highlights some of the sources of resumes. The use of the Internet as a source has grown over the past years, while more traditional sources such as newspapers have remained stable and mail has significantly declined. Satellite Offices The Division has nine satellite offices that provide professional human resources services to state agencies. Eight large agencies, Department of Administration, Department of Corrections, Department of Economic Security, Department of Health Services, Department of Juvenile Corrections, Department of Revenue, Department of Transportation and AHCCCS have an on-site human resources office dedicated to the agency. The remaining 92 agencies are provided dedicated human resources services through the Capitol Mall Personnel Office. State agencies with branches in Tucson, also have a dedicated human resources office providing services to all state agencies. These offices provide a myriad of services including: rule interpretation, consistency in human resources practices, compliance with laws, rules, policies and procedures, recruitment/staffing, employee relations, operations, classification/organization consultation and consultation regarding human resources-related issues. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 4th Level Grievances 48 33 47 36 51 0 20 40 60 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Employee Relations This section provides rule interpretation to agency human resources professionals, management and employees, assistance with policy development; guidance on employee relations issues, investigates and prepares responses to 4th level grievances submitted by agency employees and 3rd level grievances submitted by ADOA employees, and investigates and prepares recommendations in response to requests for 2nd level classification reviews. The following graphic provides information on the number of 4th level grievances processed by the Employee Relations section for the past five years. Planning & Quality Assurance This section was established to assist State agencies in reviewing their policies, practices and procedures to ensure consistent human resources practices are maintained throughout Arizona State Government. The section also provides data analysis of key human resources information and focuses on strategic planning and best practices research which will assist the Division in becoming proactive partners with its customers. Consulting Services This area provides both in-house and external services regarding various human resources related issues, such as, pending and/or changes to existing legislation, inquiries from the public, legislature and other state agencies, design, development and oversight of pilot programs and special projects. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Two General Employment Trend ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . the total number of state employees dropped to 37,293 – less than were 7 employed in 1999 . . . 30,000 32,000 34,000 36,000 38,000 40,000 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Wage Salaried Table 1 - Filled Salaried and Wage Positions 1997 - 2003 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 1999 data represents calendar year-end (Jan – Dec); 2000 through 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees, including covered and uncovered employees. Wage employees are those employees who are hired on a temporary basis and earn an hourly wage. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: The total number of filled positions declined for the first time in the past six years. The bulk of the state’s workforce is composed of salaried positions, and last year those numbers decreased by 2.4%. The number of wage positions decreased even more (15%) resulting in a total decline of the workforce of over 3%. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . once again, the majority of state agencies experienced a decline in their 8 workforce . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 2 - Filled Salaried and Wage Positions by Agency 2001, 2002, and 2003 Agency Name 2001 2002 2003 Salary Wage Salary Wage Salary Wage Small Agencies 648 319 678 309 686 319 Administration 947 34 925 37 867 32 Agriculture 340 29 315 23 313 37 AHCCCS 1,305 9 1,379 7 1,281 1 Attorney General 711 60 721 54 594 44 Banking Department 50 1 51 1 50 0 Building & Fire Safety 70 0 66 0 52 0 Coliseum & Exposition 43 0 41 0 44 0 Commerce 134 1 104 0 89 0 Corporation Commission 275 11 275 7 288 10 Corrections 9,754 95 9,298 36 9,395 31 Economic Security 9,025 819 9,811 741 9,261 538 Education 365 20 378 11 393 12 Environmental Quality 743 48 726 24 724 10 Game & Fish 528 108 532 123 554 126 Health Services 1,728 97 1,756 92 1,797 103 Historical Society 77 14 72 14 66 10 Industrial Commission 295 5 283 8 280 9 Insurance Dept 133 3 142 1 144 1 Juvenile Corrections 1,217 21 1,076 14 1,094 11 Land Dept 180 40 187 48 167 51 Lottery Commission 110 14 105 12 108 8 Medical Examiners Board 58 21 55 20 53 22 Military Affairs 409 85 410 97 408 109 Pioneers Home 106 35 103 30 106 26 Racing 40 24 37 23 31 26 Real Estate 65 0 65 0 56 1 Registrar of Contractors 137 0 134 0 143 0 Retirement System 149 12 163 7 168 7 Revenue 1,009 14 982 16 1,034 16 State Parks 284 64 282 49 267 66 Transportation 4,581 414 4,689 311 4,478 165 Veterans Service 267 18 276 12 280 11 Water Resources 232 38 229 33 201 19 Totals 36,015 2,473 36,346 2,160 35,472 1,821 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. All data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees, including covered and uncovered employees. Wage employees are those employees who are hired on a temporary basis and earn an hourly wage. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: The majority (over 60%) of state agencies (excluding the small agencies) remained the same or experienced a decrease in the number of filled positions. Twelve agencies experienced decreases of over 5%, including six agencies that had double-digit reductions. Overall the state experienced a 3.15% reduction in workforce. . . . over 87% of employees in the ADOA Human Resources System are 9 covered by the state merit system . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 3 – Covered/Uncovered Filled Positions by Agency 2003 Small Agencies 2.6% Administration 2.2% Agriculture 10.9% AHCCCS 3.4% Attorney General 2.0% Banking Department 2.2% Building & Fire Safety 0.5% Coliseum & Exposition 7.1% Commerce -0.1% Corporation Commission 5.3% Corrections 0.2% Economic Security 0.6% Education 0.5% Environmental Quality 3.0% Game & Fish 1.1% Health Services 2.4% Historical Society -1.3% Industrial Commission 1.8% Insurance Dept 4.5% Juvenile Corrections 2.9% Land Dept -0.7% Lottery Commission 1.3% Medical Examiners Board 3.6% Military Affairs 7.7% Pioneers Home 1.9% Racing 7.4% Real Estate -0.9% Registrar of Contractors 2.7% Retirement System 0.9% Revenue 0.4% State Parks -7.8% Transportation 0.2% Veterans Service Comm 2.4% Water Resources 0.8% TOTAL 0.9% Source: The state’s Human Resources Management System. Table includes all salaried positions (full-time and part-time). The distinction is made between “covered” employees (employees in positions covered by the ADOA personnel rules) and “uncovered” employees (employees in positions not covered by the ADOA personnel rules). Comments: Over 87% of the workforce in the ADOA Human Resources System is covered by the merit system. Twenty-seven out of the thirty-three larger agencies (82%) have the majority of their employees covered by the merit system. Increase in % of Uncovered from FY 02 to FY 03 87.1% 68.7% 65.4% 89.5% 87.3% 80.0% 9.5% 84.6% 83.9% 71.0% 18.9% 79.6% 96.4% 88.9% 66.7% 92.5% 81.8% 87.5% 95.3% 75.3% 60.3% 97.1% 96.6% 57.3% 33.7% 63.6% 90.4% 88.0% 32.8% 82.0% 30.0% 64.6% 45.5% 12.9% 31.3% 34.6% 10.5% 12.7% 20.0% 90.5% 15.4% 16.1% 29.0% 81.1% 20.4% 11.1% 33.3% 7.5% 18.2% 12.5% 24.7% 39.7% 42.7% 66.3% 36.4% 9.6% 12.0% 67.2% 18.0% 70.0% 35.4% 54.5% 97.2% 100% 3.6% 4.7% 2.9% 3.4% 2.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Covered Uncovered . . . Arizona ranks 43rd in the nation in the ratio of state employees to total 10 population . . . Table 4 - Rank Order of All States by Ratio of State Employment to State Population 2000 1...............Hawaii 2...............Alaska 3...............Delaware 4...............New Mexico 5...............North Dakota 6...............Wyoming 7...............Vermont 8...............Utah 9...............Louisiana 10.............Montana 11.............South Carolina 12.............Mississippi 13.............Connecticut 14.............Washington 15.............Iowa 16.............Oklahoma 17.............Rhode Island 18.............Kentucky 19.............Arkansas 20.............Alabama 21.............South Dakota 22.............West Virginia 23.............Idaho 24.............Nebraska 25.............Maryland 26.............Virginia 27.............Missouri 28.............Maine 29.............Kansas 30.............New Jersey 31.............Oregon 32.............North Carolina 33.............Colorado 34.............New Hampshire 35.............Massachusetts 36.............Minnesota 37.............Georgia United States Average 38.............Michigan 39.............Tennessee 40.............Indiana 41.............New York 42.............Texas 43........ Arizona 44.............Pennsylvania 45.............Ohio 46.............Wisconsin 47.............Florida 48.............Nevada 49.............California 50.............Illinois Source: State Employment data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Employment refers to all persons gainfully employed by and performing services for a state government. Employees include all persons paid for personal services performed, including persons paid from Federally funded programs, paid elected or appointed officials, persons in a paid leave status, and persons paid on a per meeting, annual, semiannual, or quarterly basis. Unpaid officials, pensioners, persons whose work is performed on a fee basis, and contractors and their employees are excluded from the count of employees. Comments: Arizona ranks 43rd in the nation in the ratio of state employees as compared to overall population of the state. Of the Western States, only California and Nevada have fewer employees as compared to overall population of the state. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . of the Western states, only California and Nevada have fewer employees 11 than Arizona for the population served. . . Table 5 - Ratio of All State Employment to State Population 2000 Employees per 10,000 Population Source: State Employment data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Employment refers to all persons gainfully employed by and performing services for a state government. Employees include all persons paid for personal services performed, including persons paid from Federally funded programs, paid elected or appointed officials, persons in a paid leave status, and persons paid on a per meeting, annual, semiannual, or quarterly basis. Unpaid officials, pensioners, persons whose work is performed on a fee basis, and contractors and their employees are excluded from the count of employees. Comments: Arizona ranks 43rd in the nation, and 9th out of the 11 Western states in the ratio of state employees as compared to overall population of the state. NV 112 UT 221 AZ 126 CA 105 CO 153 NM 263 OR 156 ID 175 WY 227 MT 199 WA 191 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . Arizona ranks 47th in the nation when comparing total payroll to the 12 state’s population. . . Table 6 - Rank Order of All States by Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 1...............Alaska 2...............Hawaii 3...............Delaware 4...............Connecticut 5...............New Mexico 6...............Vermont 7...............Rhode Island 8...............North Dakota 9...............Iowa 10.............Washington 11.............New Jersey 12.............Utah 13.............Louisiana 14.............Wyoming 15.............Montana 16.............Colorado 17.............Maryland 18.............Massachusetts 19.............Kentucky 20.............South Carolina 21.............Minnesota 22.............Mississippi 23.............Virginia 24.............Oklahoma 25.............Arkansas 26.............Michigan 27.............New York 28.............Idaho 29.............Oregon 30.............Alabama United States Average 31.............West Virginia 32.............Maine 33.............South Dakota 34.............Kansas 35.............North Carolina 36.............New Hampshire 37.............California 38.............Wisconsin 39.............Missouri 40.............Nebraska 41.............Georgia 42.............Pennsylvania 43.............Indiana 44.............Texas 45.............Tennessee 46.............Ohio 47........ Arizona 48.............Nevada 49.............Florida 50.............Illinois Source: State Payroll data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Data in these files are based on information obtained in the Annual Survey of Government Employment and Payroll. Approximately one-half of the state governments provided data from central payroll records for all or most of their agencies/institutions. Data for agencies and institutions for the remaining state governments were obtained by mail canvass questionnaires. Comments: Arizona ranks 47th in the ratio of total state payroll as compared to overall population of the state. Of the Western States, only Nevada has a lower ratio of total state payroll compared to the overall population of the state. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . of the Western states, only Nevada’s payroll is less than Arizona’s when 13 compared to the state’s population. . . Table 7 - Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 Dollars per Citizen Source: State Payroll data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Data in these files are based on information obtained in the Annual Survey of Government Employment and Payroll. Approximately one-half of the state governments provided data from central payroll records for all or most of their agencies/institutions. Data for agencies and institutions for the remaining state governments were obtained by mail canvass questionnaires. Comments: Arizona ranks 47th in the ratio of total state payroll as compared to overall population of the state. Of the Western States, only Nevada has a lower ratio of total state payroll compared to the overall population of the state. NV $36.86 UT $60.64 AZ $36.90 CA $44.62 CO $56.34 NM $72.03 OR $48.88 ID $49.53 WY $57.59 MT $56.57 WA $63.31 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Three Equal Employment ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the state’s workforce is more diverse than the available labor force within 15 Arizona . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS White 75.6% African American 2.6% Hispanic 16.8% Asian 1.5% Native American 3.5% White 64.2% African American 6.9% Hispanic 23.8% Asian 2.1% Native American 2.9% Table 8 – Distribution of State Government Employees by Ethnic Group 2003 Source: The Governor’s Office of Equal Opportunity, Arizona State Workforce Distribution Chart, June 2003. Comments: The majority of the state’s workforce is comprised of Whites, and Hispanics. Overall, the state government’s workforce is more diverse than the available labor force. State Government Employees Arizona Labor Force . . . the professional occupational group accounts for the largest portion of the 16 workforce . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 9 – Distribution of State Government Employees by Occupational Group 2003 Source: The Governor’s Office of Equal Opportunity, Arizona State Workforce Distribution Chart, June 2003. Categories are based upon the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Occupational Categories for State and Local Government (EEO-4). Comments: State employees categorized as professionals comprise the largest percentage (42%) of the eight occupational groupings. Skilled craft (2%) and service workers (4%) encompass the smallest percentage. Officials & Administrators 6.7% Professionals 42.4% Technicians 5.5% Paraprofessionals 10.5% Service 4.1% Skilled Craft 1.6% Office & Clerical 8.7% Protective Services 20.4% . . . the percentage of minorities has steadily increased over the years . . . 17 Table 10 - Changes in Salaried Employment by Race and Gender 1997 - 2003 Non-Minority Minority Total Year Male Female Male Female Male Female Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1997 11,801 34.9% 11,409 33.7% 4,450 13.2% 6,178 18.3% 16,251 48.0% 17,587 52.0% 1998 11,731 34.3% 11,349 33.2% 4,679 13.7% 6,454 18.9% 16,410 48.0% 17,803 52.0% 1999 11,868 34.0% 11,439 32.7% 4,885 14.0% 6,758 19.3% 16,753 47.9% 18,197 52.1% 2000 11,732 33.4% 11,447 32.6% 4,962 14.1% 6,942 19.8% 16,694 47.6% 18,389 52.4% 2001 11,732 33.4% 11,447 32.6% 4,962 14.1% 6,942 19.8% 16,694 47.6% 18,389 52.4% 2002 11,483 32.0% 11,660 32.4% 5,147 14.3% 7,645 21.3% 16,630 46.3% 19,305 53.7% 2003 11,187 31.5% 11,322 31.9% 5,447 15.4% 7,505 21.2% 16,634 46.9% 18,827 53.1% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 1997 through 1999 data compiled in December; 2000 through 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: The percentage of minority male employees continued a gradual increase, while the number of minority female employees remained the same. Table 11 - Changes in Salaried Employment of Minorities 1997 - 2003 African-American Hispanic Others Year Male Female Male Female Male Female Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1997 866 2.6% 1,339 4.0% 3,020 8.9% 3,939 11.6% 564 1.7% 900 2.7% 1998 914 2.7% 1,388 4.1% 3,168 9.3% 4,139 12.1% 597 1.7% 927 2.7% 1999 935 2.7% 1,422 4.1% 3,310 9.5% 4,355 12.5% 640 1.8% 981 2.8% 2000 938 2.7% 1,441 4.1% 3,376 9.6% 4,501 12.8% 648 1.8% 1,000 2.8% 2001 938 2.7% 1,441 4.1% 3,376 9.6% 4,501 12.8% 648 1.8% 1,000 2.8% 2002 950 2.6% 1,517 4.2% 3,525 9.8% 5,036 14.0% 672 1.9% 1,092 3.0% 2003 1,279 3.6% 1,493 4.2% 3,475 9.8% 4,941 13.9% 693 2.0% 1,071 3.0% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 1997 through 1999 data compiled in December; 2000 through 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: Over the past six years, the number of minority employees in all classes has increased or remained relatively stable. This past year, the largest increase was observed in the percentage of male African-Americans. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . minorities comprise over 36% of the employees in the ADOA Human 18 Resources system . . . Table 12 – Minority Representation by Agency Salaried Employees 2003 Small Agencies Administration Agriculture AHCCCS Attorney General Banking Department Building & Fire Safety Commerce Corporation Commission Corrections Economic Security Education Environmental Quality Game & Fish Health Services Historical Society Industrial Commission Insurance Dept Juvenile Corrections Land Dept Lottery Commission Medical Examiners Board Military Affairs Pioneers Home Racing Real Estate Registrar of Contractors Retirement System Revenue State Parks Transportation Veterans Service Comm Water Resources TOTAL Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. Comments: The table above shows the proportion of minority employees of each of the large state agencies. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 15.9% 43.9% 36.7% 15.8% 39.1% 24.6% 21.0% 19.6% 21.9% 16.0% 38.1% 10.9% 27.5% 12.2% 38.0% 19.7% 44.1% 10.6% 32.2% 9.7% 25.4% 24.5% 45.2% 34.3% 26.7% 20.5% 15.4% 13.2% 21.9% 42.1% 31.8% 34.0% 41.2% 84.1% 56.1% 63.3% 84.2% 60.9% 75.4% 79.0% 80.4% 78.1% 84.0% 61.9% 89.1% 72.5% 87.8% 62.0% 80.3% 55.9% 89.4% 67.8% 90.3% 74.6% 75.5% 54.8% 65.7% 73.3% 79.5% 84.6% 86.8% 78.1% 57.9% 68.2% 66.0% 58.8% 36.5% 63.5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Minorities White . . . females comprise over 53% of the workforce in the ADOA Human 19 Resources system . . . Table 13 – Gender Representation by Agency Salaried Employees 2003 Small Agencies Administration Agriculture AHCCCS Attorney General Banking Department Building & Fire Safety Commerce Corporation Commission Corrections Economic Security Education Environmental Quality Game & Fish Health Services Historical Society Industrial Commission Insurance Dept Juvenile Corrections Land Dept Lottery Commission Medical Examiners Board Military Affairs Pioneers Home Racing Real Estate Registrar of Contractors Retirement System Revenue State Parks Transportation Veterans Service Comm Water Resources TOTAL Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. Comments: Nineteen of the thirty-three agencies (58%) have over 50% females representing their workforce. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 50.2% 74.3% 42.2% 43.1% 61.4% 60.9% 48.3% 60.7% 34.4% 67.0% 23.2% 65.5% 52.3% 40.7% 45.6% 62.5% 65.6% 60.6% 62.8% 35.3% 48.4% 73.3% 74.9% 34.4% 52.1% 65.2% 38.5% 52.8% 65.7% 77.4% 36.7% 48.1% 48.7% 49.8% 25.7% 57.8% 56.9% 38.6% 39.1% 51.7% 39.3% 65.6% 33.0% 76.8% 34.5% 47.7% 59.3% 54.4% 37.5% 34.4% 39.4% 37.2% 64.7% 51.6% 26.7% 25.1% 65.6% 47.9% 34.8% 61.5% 47.2% 34.3% 22.6% 63.3% 51.9% 51.3% 53.4% 46.6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Females Males Section Four Employee Mobility ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the separation rate for covered salaried employees (15.4%) has returned to 21 historic levels . . . Table 14 - Changes in Separations from State Service by Wage and Salaried Employees 1997 - 2003 Retirements Resignations Terminations Other Total Turnover Year Total Employees Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Wage 2,360 11 0.5% 327 13.9% 58 2.5% 735 31.1% 1,131 47.9% Covered 31,942 334 1.0% 3,301 10.3% 732 2.3% 342 1.1% 4,709 14.7% 1997 Uncovered 1,960 20 1.0% 318 16.2% 45 2.3% 59 3.0% 442 22.6% Wage 2,248 19 0.8% 363 16.1% 54 2.4% 820 36.5% 1,256 55.9% 1998 Covered 32,261 273 0.8% 3,332 10.3% 712 2.2% 282 0.9% 4,599 14.3% Uncovered 2,193 16 0.7% 197 9.0% 23 1.0% 44 2.0% 280 12.8% Wage 2,344 7 0.3% 374 16.0% 66 2.8% 787 33.6% 1,234 52.6% 1999 Covered 32,306 323 1.0% 3,692 11.4% 835 2.6% 298 0.9% 5,148 15.9% Uncovered 2,761 20 0.7% 273 9.9% 52 1.9% 86 3.1% 431 15.6% Wage 2,308 13 0.6% 407 17.6% 81 3.5% 861 37.3% 1,362 59.0% 2000 Covered 32,072 309 1.0% 3,904 12.2% 838 2.6% 244 0.8% 5,295 16.5% Uncovered 3,469 18 0.5% 397 11.4% 63 1.8% 72 2.1% 550 15.9% Wage 2,473 8 0.3% 245 9.9% 57 2.3% 506 20.5% 816 33.0% 2001 Covered 31,957 267 0.8% 3,647 11.4% 717 2.2% 233 0.7% 4,864 15.2% Uncovered 4,058 24 0.6% 434 10.7% 69 1.7% 57 1.4% 584 14.4% Wage 2,160 7 0.3% 120 5.6% 45 2.1% 390 18.1% 562 26.0% 2002 Covered 31,986 249 0.8% 2,897 9.1% 638 2.0% 292 0.9% 4,076 12.7% Uncovered 4,360 19 0.4% 284 6.5% 67 1.5% 63 1.4% 433 9.9% Wage 2,055 20 0.3% 224 10.9% 72 3.5% 873 42.5% 1,189 57.9% 2003 Covered 31,828 523 1.6% 3,323 10.4% 629 2.0% 423 1.3% 4,898 15.4% Uncovered 4,589 92 2.0% 412 9.0% 109 2.4% 142 3.1% 755 16.5% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 1999 data represents calendar year-end (Jan – Dec); 2000 through 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees, including covered and uncovered employees. Wage employees are those employees who are hired on a temporary basis and earn an hourly wage. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. The information reflected herein for separation rates may be different than the data reported previously based on a change in methodology used to gather the information for this report. Comments: In all three categories (wage, covered-salaried, and uncovered-salaried) separation rates have returned to levels last seen in 2001. The average separation rate for all categories combined was 17.8% last year. Among covered, salaried employees, resignations remain the leading category of separations. The relative percentage of retirements of covered and uncovered, salaried employees has increased to the highest levels experienced in the past seven years. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the majority of state agencies experienced an increase in separation 22 rates . . . Table 15 – Separation Rates of Covered, Salaried Employees by Agency 1997 – 2003 Agency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Small Agencies 11.2% 18.5% 14.9% 15.2% 14.3% 22.4% 16.0% Administration 13.4% 12.5% 14.7% 15.8% 17.6% 14.4% 15.2% Agriculture 12.0% 10.3% 12.2% 18.1% 21.9% 20.2% 12.9% AHCCCS 3.3% 9.9% 13.4% 12.2% 15.9% 11.5% 15.3% Attorney General 15.9% 13.8% 13.5% 17.3% 20.4% 13.5% 21.1% Banking Department 7.3% 4.7% 2.1% 6.5% 13.6% 2.2% 8.8% Building & Fire Safety 8.7% 13.1% 13.1% 15.6% 15.4% 5.0% 21.0% Commerce 49.5% 15.6% 19.1% 14.5% 8.6% 2.9% 3.2% Corporation Commission 13.4% 0.0% 10.3% 14.5% 11.4% 8.7% 12.3% Corrections 19.5% 16.4% 16.7% 20.4% 17.7% 17.2% 17.7% Economic Security 16.2% 14.0% 16.1% 13.0% 10.7% 10.7% 13.7% Education 0.0% 20.7% 20.0% 18.2% 14.3% 14.8% 24.1% Environmental Quality 2.6% 8.0% 13.1% 15.5% 10.6% 8.1% 8.0% Game & Fish 1.7% 7.9% 11.4% 9.1% 9.7% 6.4% 6.3% Health Services 16.8% 17.2% 16.6% 18.4% 21.6% 9.1% 19.7% Historical Society 7.6% 39.3% 12.7% 23.3% 14.3% 17.2% 17.7% Industrial Commission 2.1% 9.0% 9.7% 14.6% 15.9% 4.1% 11.0% Insurance Dept 5.6% 11.8% 11.1% 15.7% 12.4% 11.9% 14.3% Juvenile Corrections 35.1% 17.3% 36.4% 29.9% 29.3% 24.0% 29.6% Land Dept 5.1% 10.3% 11.1% 16.5% 13.5% 3.4% 14.6% Lottery Commission 4.2% 16.9% 15.7% 9.1% 5.6% 7.1% 9.3% Medical Examiners Board 13.3% 34.6% 46.2% 50.0% 50.0% 400% 150.0% Military Affairs 10.2% 9.0% 14.5% 15.9% 13.7% 7.3% 14.1% Pioneers Home 9.9% 8.0% 17.6% 25.0% 21.0% 7.8% 15.8% Racing 0.0% 12.9% 12.1% 3.1% 9.4% 3.4% 19.2% Real Estate 5.5% 9.6% 7.5% 25.5% 13.0% 3.7% 20.2% Registrar of Contractors 4.0% 12.6% 8.0% 13.8% 10.7% 6.0% 2.5% Retirement System 7.8% 15.7% 31.3% 11.1% 8.7% 58.8% 6.1% Revenue 2.8% 12.1% 9.5% 12.6% 13.5% 4.9% 10.4% State Parks 6.5% 9.7% 10.7% 13.9% 10.2% 4.5% 9.1% Transportation 12.6% 11.9% 12.7% 12.9% 13.4% 10.8% 12.3% Veterans Service 20.7% 48.4% 49.7% 56.5% 49.5% 19.8% 23.0% Water Resources 3.7% 7.6% 7.9% 15.1% 11.9% 3.1% 14.7% Total 14.7% 14.3% 15.9% 16.5% 15.2% 12.7% 15.4% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 1999 data represents calendar year-end (Jan – Dec); 2000 through 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees; this table represents filled, covered positions only – it does not include uncovered or vacant positions. The information reflected herein for separation rates may be different than the data reported previously based on a change in methodology used to gather the information for this report. Comments: The rate of separations from state service appears to have returned to rates typical during the past few years. Twenty-six of the thirty-three larger agencies (79%) experienced an increase in separation rates. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . voluntary resignations were the most common reason for employees 23 leaving state service . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 16 - Separations of Covered, Salaried Employees by Type by Agency 2003 Agency Voluntary Involuntary Other Total Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Small Agencies 40 12.5% 4 1.3% 7 2.2% 51 16.0% Administration 72 12.2% 15 2.5% 3 0.5% 90 15.2% Agriculture 12 11.1% 2 1.8% 0 0.0% 14 12.9% AHCCCS 143 12.7% 29 2.6% 1 0.1% 173 15.3% Attorney General 33 14.2% 16 6.9% 0 0.0% 49 21.1% Banking Department 2 4.4% 1 2.2% 1 2.2% 4 8.8% Building & Fire Safety 9 17.1% 2 3.8% 0 0.0% 11 21.0% Commerce 1 3.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 3.2% Corporation Commission 17 9.9% 3 1.8% 1 0.6% 21 12.3% Corrections 1,442 15.9% 125 1.4% 43 0.5% 1,610 17.7% Economic Security 1,116 11.8% 181 1.9% 0 0.0% 1,297 13.7% Education 54 22.8% 3 1.3% 0 0.0% 57 24.1% Environmental Quality 41 7.3% 3 0.5% 1 0.2% 45 8.0% Game & Fish 31 6.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.4% 33 6.3% Health Services 241 15.1% 72 4.5% 1 0.1% 314 19.7% Historical Society 10 17.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10 17.7% Industrial Commission 22 8.4% 7 2.7% 0 0.0% 29 11.0% Insurance Dept 12 12.2% 2 2.0% 0 0.0% 14 14.3% Juvenile Corrections 261 25.4% 38 3.7% 5 0.5% 304 29.6% Land Dept 19 11.1% 6 3.5% 0 0.0% 25 14.6% Lottery Commission 6 7.0% 2 2.3% 0 0.0% 8 9.3% Medical Examiners Board 0 0.0% 2 150.0% 0 0.0% 2 150.0% Military Affairs 11 12.0% 2 2.2% 0 0.0% 13 14.1% Pioneers Home 14 13.8% 2 2.0% 0 0.0% 16 15.8% Racing 4 15.4% 1 3.8% 0 0.0% 5 19.2% Real Estate 8 16.1% 2 4.0% 0 0.0% 10 20.2% Registrar of Contractors 3 2.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 2.5% Retirement System 1 6.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 6.1% Revenue 67 8.5% 14 1.8% 1 0.1% 82 10.4% State Parks 20 8.6% 1 0.4% 0 0.0% 21 9.1% Transportation 418 9.9% 98 2.3% 4 0.1% 520 12.3% Veterans Service 31 16.2% 13 6.8% 0 0.0% 44 23.0% Water Resources 12 8.4% 9 6.3% 0 0.0% 21 14.7% Total 4,173 13.1% 655 2.1% 70 0.3% 4,898 15.4% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees; this table represents filled, covered positions only – it does not include uncovered or vacant positions. The information reflected herein for separation rates may be different than the data reported previously based on a change in methodology used to gather the information for this report. Comments: Voluntary separations are the most common type of separation from state service, accounting for over 85% of separations this past year. . . . several classes have separation rates well above the average . . . 24 Table 17 – Most Populous Class Titles 2003 Class Title Number Corrections Officer II 5,312 Program Services Evaluators (I, II, III, IV) 2,435 Motor Vehicle Division Customer Service Rep 784 Customer Service Rep 718 Child Protective Services Spec III 711 Human Services Spec II 573 Corrections Sergeant 569 Administrative Assistant II 458 Habitation Technician II 401 Secretary 327 Program & Project Spec II 360 Clerk Typist II 250 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The above table includes all employees (full-time, part-time, seasonal, limited, covered, uncovered, etc) Comments: The title of Corrections Officer II is by far the most populated class in the state, followed by Program Services Evaluator. After those two classes, the numbers of employees in any given class rapidly decreases. The top eight classes listed this year were also on the list of most populous classes last year. Table 18 –Classes With The Highest Separation Rates 2003 Class Title Separation Rate Special Agent 55.0% Youth Correctional Officer I 48.7% Residential Program Specialist I 47.1% Habitation Technician II 42.7% Mental Health Program Specialist II 37.9% ASH Security Officer I 35.0% Custodial Worker I 34.1% Correctional Registered Nursing Supervisor I 33.3% Correctional Registered Nurse 33.1% Nursing Assistant 32.6% Psychiatric Nurse II 32.4% Youth Correctional Sergeant 32.0% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System, Turnover Report PER201-08. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). Percentage turnover is based on the number of employees leaving the class divided by the number of employees in the class. Comments: Classes associated with the Correctional and Social Services industries have experienced the highest separation rates relative to the number of employees in their respective classes. Seven of the twelve classes identified were on last year’s list, including four of the top five. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Five Employment Characteristics ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the average annual wages for covered employees increased last year . . . 26 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 19 – Agency Comparison of Average Wages per Employee 1997 - 2002 Average Covered Employee Wages Agency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Small Agencies $24,622 $28,865 $29,535 $31,029 $31,814 $33,913 Administration $25,001 $28,638 $28,892 $28,331 $29,617 $30,848 Agriculture $23,675 $26,522 $27,793 $27,285 $29,275 $29,626 AHCCCS $23,034 $24,812 $25,698 $26,505 $24,524 $27,600 Attorney General $24,376 $29,993 $31,580 $31,634 $34,189 $33,950 Banking Department $27,329 $30,129 $31,525 $32,907 $34,867 $37,012 Building & Fire Safety $22,816 $24,150 $25,229 $26,580 $26,837 $28,696 Coliseum & Exposition $31,057 $36,999 $34,944 $36,345 $34,089 $34,015 Commerce $29,013 $32,992 $33,162 $33,929 $36,159 $39,004 Corporation Commission $26,061 $30,268 $30,013 $32,862 $34,941 $36,665 Corrections $25,481 $26,292 $28,205 $30,128 $30,837 $30,478 Economic Security $22,819 $24,563 $26,080 $26,815 $25,507 $28,934 Education $27,587 $28,895 $30,621 $31,766 $32,898 $33,615 Environmental Quality $28,207 $31,489 $32,869 $33,466 $33,386 $34,725 Game & Fish $27,163 $30,621 $31,352 $34,586 $35,364 $35,860 Health Services $25,211 $28,326 $29,389 $29,292 $30,930 $31,677 Historical Society $20,565 $21,943 $24,501 $26,305 $25,330 $25,444 Industrial Commission $24,178 $26,776 $27,243 $27,028 $29,548 $30,967 Insurance Dept $22,287 $28,244 $29,688 $29,416 $29,500 $32,121 Juvenile Corrections $23,045 $22,860 $25,791 $27,620 $29,849 $28,705 Land Dept $28,381 $34,516 $32,937 $33,723 $34,676 $39,210 Lottery Commission $22,119 $27,252 $28,961 $30,413 $31,828 $31,788 Medical Examiners Board $20,306 $23,562 $16,057 $23,494 $22,498 $25,591 Military Affairs $24,891 $26,545 $26,893 $28,249 $29,776 $30,554 Pioneers Home $18,746 $22,215 $21,353 $21,793 $23,899 $24,202 Racing $26,424 $28,303 $31,114 $32,862 $34,669 $37,619 Real Estate $23,243 $24,903 $26,294 $26,685 $26,448 $29,276 Registrar of Contractors $23,409 $28,849 $25,856 $29,567 $31,100 $32,036 Retirement System $26,075 $28,511 $28,558 $28,598 $28,456 $28,516 Revenue $23,025 $27,176 $27,379 $26,581 $27,433 $28,719 State Parks $24,924 $26,661 $27,065 $26,263 $29,405 $32,063 Transportation $27,132 $29,387 $28,996 $28,866 $28,973 $29,971 Veterans Service Comm $13,419 $19,035 $18,219 $19,492 $22,322 $24,774 Water Resources $28,351 $33,163 $33,804 $32,986 $37,154 $39,447 Overall Average $24,613 $26,608 $27,820 $28,725 $28,791 $30,174 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 2002 data compiled from actual dollars paid from calendar year end files. Figures above include wages, dollars added to base, overtime, payments for on-call, and any payments for leave. Figures do not include uncovered employees, employees in the “Executive” pay plan, or employees on leave without pay or on long-term disability. Comments: The average wages actually paid to covered state employees increased by 4.8% from last year. Much of this increase was due to a General Salary Adjustment that occurred in April, 2002. However, five agencies actually experienced a decrease in the average wage for their covered employees from 2001 to 2002. . . . the total costs for overtime expenditures has decreased the last 27 two years . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 20 – Total Overtime Costs by Agency 2001 – 2003 Agency 2001 2002 2003 Small Agencies $65,711 $72,381 $87,133 Administration $248,041 $285,718 $393,815 Agriculture $222,665 $190,945 $239,197 AHCCCS $171,390 $136,330 $59,761 Attorney General $88,037 $25,917 $29,184 Banking Department $0 $182 $0 Building & Fire Safety $0 $0 $118 Coliseum & Exposition $600,613 $506,642 $484,657 Commerce $5,002 $65 $248 Corporation Commission $209,907 $192,246 $162,306 Corrections $13,799,385 $8,491,476 $6,174,851 Economic Security $7,273,024 $6,813,169 $3,853,731 Education $188,938 $104,882 $61,857 Environmental Quality $131,522 $100,002 $67,921 Game & Fish $82,790 $76,198 $85,462 Health Services $1,468,332 $1,392,952 $1,094,577 Historical Society $5,752 $5,617 $652 Industrial Commission $0 $100 $498 Insurance Dept $17,392 $328 $2,889 Juvenile Corrections $1,081,562 $605,062 $1,226,511 Land Dept $394,830 $291,957 $297,099 Lottery Commission $15,440 $6,799 $22,844 Medical Examiners Board $4,460 $4,453 $1,614 Military Affairs $315,922 $267,302 $341,902 Pioneers Home $27,222 $31,263 $6,104 Racing $3,498 $4,634 $4,783 Real Estate $0 $90 $427 Registrar of Contractors $1,254 $2,668 $1,997 Retirement System $16,080 $65,923 $17,378 Revenue $202,288 $187,638 $159,997 State Parks $58,007 $43,635 $70,357 Transportation $6,624,480 $6,107,385 $5,123,179 Veterans Service $487,262 $260,164 $164,980 Water Resources $3,116 $0 $151 Overall Average $33,813,922 $26,274,123 $20,238,180 Source: The state's financial system (Arizona Financial Information System). Data is based on a fiscal year basis (July 1 through June 30) after all corrections have been made at the close of the fiscal year. Expenses may be charged to prior “appropriation years” yet in general are illustrated in the year in which the expense occurred. Data includes all funding sources. Employees who were eligible for overtime (both FLSA-exempt and non-exempt) who actually received cash payment for overtime. Not included were employees (both FLSA exempt and non-exempt) who received compensatory time at the appropriate rate for their additional overtime hours worked. FLSA excluded personnel were not included in the calculations, nor were any agencies which compensated their employees for additional hours worked with compensatory time. Comments: Total overtime expenses last year declined by 23%, continuing the previous year’s decline of 22%. Seventeen agencies decreased spending on overtime, while sixteen agencies (plus the combined small agencies) increased their overtime expenditures. . . . five agencies account for 85% of the State’s total overtime expenses. . . 28 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 21 – Distribution of Overtime Costs by Agency 2003 Source: The state's financial system (Arizona Financial Information System). Data is based on a fiscal year basis (July 1 through June 30) after all corrections have been made at the close of the fiscal year. Expenses may be charged to prior “appropriation years” yet in general are illustrated in the year in which the expense occurred. Data includes all funding sources. Employees who were eligible for overtime (both FLSA-exempt and non-exempt) who actually received cash payment for overtime. Not included were employees (both FLSA exempt and non-exempt) who received compensatory time at the appropriate rate for their additional overtime hours worked. FLSA excluded personnel were not included in the calculations, nor were any agencies which compensated their employees for additional hours worked with compensatory time. Comments: Five agencies accounted for over 85% of the total overtime expenses last year. These same five agencies have accounted for the majority of overtime over the last three years. Corrections 30.5% Transportation 25.3% Juvenile Corrections 6.1% All Other Agencies 13.7% Economic Security 19.0% Health Services 5.4% . . . the average cost for sick leave increased by 10% last year . . . 29 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 22 – Average Sick Leave Use And Average Costs Per Employee by Agency 1997 – 2002 Avg Sick Leave Days Avg Sick Leave Costs Agency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Small Agencies 5.5 5.3 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.6 $677 $715 $800 $821 $833 $908 Administration 5.6 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 6.0 $660 $734 $758 $792 $813 $899 Agriculture 6.5 5.7 4.8 4.8 5.2 5.2 $683 $646 $559 $569 $641 $660 AHCCCS 6.8 6.4 6.9 7.1 6.6 7.4 $729 $723 $787 $846 $820 $979 Attorney General 5.1 6.3 5.6 5.9 5.5 5.6 $829 $1,094 $1,003 $1,080 $1,072 $1,105 Banking Department 6.3 6.0 6.7 6.2 6.5 4.3 $795 $858 $980 $943 $1,043 $687 Building & Fire Safety 5.2 6.6 7.0 6.8 7.6 10.5 $554 $737 $800 $794 $924 $1,329 Coliseum & Exposition 5.0 5.1 9.2 9.9 6.6 6.6 $622 $685 $1,266 $1,420 $953 $1,020 Commerce 6.0 5.9 4.6 3.9 4.4 5.3 $873 $908 $737 $628 $757 $985 Corporation Commission 4.7 5.1 4.9 5.8 6.3 5.7 $641 $743 $751 $904 $1,070 $988 Corrections 6.3 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.9 6.7 $662 $662 $707 $787 $849 $865 Economic Security 7.0 7.1 7.6 7.5 6.7 7.6 $686 $737 $817 $831 $779 $927 Education 6.9 8.4 6.3 5.8 5.1 6.6 $869 $1,090 $851 $824 $781 $1,060 Environmental Quality 6.6 6.7 7.6 7.7 7.1 7.7 $841 $910 $1,067 $1,112 $1,069 $1,208 Game & Fish 4.3 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.1 4.1 $497 $503 $555 $615 $575 $593 Health Services 6.4 6.9 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.5 $740 $841 $817 $850 $881 $946 Historical Society 5.1 4.3 6.1 6.6 5.5 7.0 $535 $485 $694 $787 $661 $870 Industrial Commission 6.2 7.1 7.0 6.3 5.8 7.1 $663 $803 $821 $739 $730 $938 Insurance Dept 4.4 5.2 5.6 5.3 4.7 5.4 $493 $641 $730 $740 $695 $871 Juvenile Corrections 5.0 4.8 5.3 6.2 6.5 6.8 $544 $540 $623 $785 $842 $914 Land Dept 6.2 6.8 6.0 5.6 6.3 6.2 $783 $897 $802 $788 $937 $963 Lottery Commission 4.7 5.5 6.5 8.2 5.7 5.7 $602 $735 $866 $1,130 $807 $852 Medical Examiners Board 4.7 5.1 3.2 4.5 4.5 3.3 $559 $670 $449 $691 $705 $560 Military Affairs 6.3 6.3 6.4 6.1 6.1 6.6 $652 $689 $718 $726 $768 $888 Pioneers Home 6.1 7.2 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.6 $503 $636 $618 $666 $704 $796 Racing 5.0 6.5 3.4 6.6 9.6 6.9 $569 $811 $439 $853 $1,363 $1,046 Real Estate 7.3 6.2 6.4 9.3 8.4 10.8 $838 $743 $790 $1,175 $1,071 $1,409 Registrar of Contractors 5.7 6.7 6.4 6.8 6.6 6.2 $613 $807 $786 $858 $881 $855 Retirement System 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 4.4 4.2 $672 $744 $801 $860 $724 $762 Revenue 6.7 6.5 7.1 7.3 7.0 7.2 $710 $738 $845 $890 $890 $975 State Parks 4.8 4.4 4.9 5.6 6.3 6.3 $526 $472 $542 $622 $788 $821 Transportation 6.8 6.6 6.7 6.5 6.3 6.7 $740 $736 $757 $780 $776 $864 Veterans Service Comm 4.1 5.4 4.8 4.4 4.4 5.6 $344 $501 $484 $487 $502 $660 Water Resources 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.7 5.7 6.7 $848 $910 $924 $1,052 $975 $1,228 Overall Average 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 6.5 6.8 $687 $723 $767 $814 $821 $907 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 2002 data compiled from actual dollars paid for sick leave from calendar year end files. The calculation of average sick hours was determined by dividing the total dollars paid by the average hourly rate then dividing by the number of employees. Only employees who were eligible for, earned and used sick leave (both covered and uncovered, wage employees were excluded) were included in these calculations. Comments: The average cost of sick leave increased by over 10% last year. Since 1997, over 94% of agencies have experienced an increase in their average sick leave costs, averaging nearly 45% during that time period. . . . the average age of employees is 44.1 years . . . 30 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 23 – Age Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). Numbers are based upon all full- and part-time, covered and uncovered, salaried employees. Comments: The above chart shows the age distribution for all salaried employees. In 2003, the average age of a state employee was 44.1 years, and more employees were in the 45-49 and 50-54 age group than any other age group. In 1998, 42% of the workforce was over 50, whereas in 2003 only 36% of the workforce was over 50 years of age. In 1998 only 18% of the workforce was less than 35 years of age; however in 2003 24% was less than 35 years of age. The Council of State Governments (October 2002) reported a national average of 44.5 years for state employees, and 21 of the 40 other states reporting have an older workforce than Arizona. 0.1% 3.6% 8.6% 11.5%11.9% 13.8% 14.7%14.7% 12.5% 6.5% 2.0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% up to 19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65 and Age older 1998 2003 . . . over 65% of the state’s workforce has less than 10 years of experience. . . 31 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 24 – Length of Service Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). Numbers are based upon all full- and part-time, covered and uncovered, salaried employees. Comments: The above chart shows the length of service distribution for all state employees. The average length of service for the state was 8.1 years of service. The vast majority of state employees (over 43%) have been hired within the last 4 years, and almost 67% of employees have less than 10 years of service with the state. By way of comparison, the Council of State Governments (October 2002) reported a national average of 11.2 years of service for state employees, and 31 of the 37 other states reporting have more tenured employees than Arizona. 43.3% 23.4% 14.8% 10.1% 4.5% 2.7% 0.8% 0.2% 0.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 4 or less 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40 yrs+ Years of State Service 1998 2003 . . . overall job satisfaction has gradually decreased over the years . . . 32 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 25 – Employee Survey 1999 - 2002 Agree/Strongly Agree Statement 1999 2000 2001 2002 Overall, I am satisfied with my job. 72% 68% 68% 64% I understand clearly what is expected of me at work. 76% 78% 78% 75% I receive adequate feedback on my work. 59% 57% 57% 55% I have the proper tools and equipment to do my work. 60% 58% 57% 56% I receive recognition for my work when I deserve it. 50% 47% 47% 46% I have the opportunity to learn and do new things in my job. 65% 62% 62% 58% My agency supports my participation in training opportunities to improve my job skills. 63% 62% 59% 54% My agency supports my participation in education and professional development opportunities. 57% 56% 55% 48% My agency values my ideas on work-related problems. 48% 45% 45% 43% My agency has a good system in place for communicating necessary information to staff. 45% 43% 44% 43% Senior management (Assistant Director level and above) in my agency show care and concern for employees. 43% 38% 39% 37% Source: Governor’s Office of Excellence in Government. The statewide employee survey is typically administered in September- October. Surveys are distributed to the agencies and should provide a representative sampling of ALL employees, including wage and salaried; covered and uncovered. In 1999, roughly 10,000 surveys were collected, in 2002, nearly 20,000 were collected. Comments: There has been a gradual decrease in most indicators of employee satisfaction from 1999 through 2002. The decline is most evident in the areas of training and professional development opportunities. . . . most of the state’s workforce resides in Maricopa County . . . 33 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 26 – State Employees by County 2003 Source: The state’s Human Resources Management System. Percentages indicate number of employees in the ADOA Human Resources System agencies as of fiscal year-end 2003. Comments: The majority of state employees reside in Maricopa county, followed by Pima and Pinal counties. These three counties account for over 82% of all state employees. 0.9% 2.1% 2.3% 1.9% 1.3% 0.2% 2.9% 62.7% 6.1% 13.5% 1.1% 1.2% 3.1% 0.1% 0.5% Front and Back Cover Photography by Human Resources employee Ed Miksch
Object Description
TITLE | State of Arizona workforce report |
CREATOR | Arizona. Dept. of Administration. |
SUBJECT | Arizona--Officials and employees; |
Browse Topic | Work and labor |
DESCRIPTION | This title contains one or more publications. Published annually in compliance with the Arizona Revised Statutes section 41-763.01. The report provides data regarding the status of the State’s workforce and the operations of the State’s Human Resources System. |
Language | English |
Publisher | Arizona. Dept. of Administration. |
TYPE | Text |
Material Collection | State Documents |
RIGHTS MANAGEMENT | Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be downloaded, reproduced or distributed in any format without written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution. |
Source Identifier | ADM 5.3:H 85 |
Location | o862432703 |
REPOSITORY | Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records |
Description
TITLE | State of Arizona workforce report: 2003 |
DESCRIPTION | 39 pages (PDF version), File Size: 936 kb |
TYPE | Text |
RIGHTS MANAGEMENT | Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be downloaded, reproduced or distributed in any format without written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution. |
DATE ORIGINAL | 2003 |
Time Period | 2000s (2000-2009) |
ORIGINAL FORMAT | Born Digital |
Source Identifier | ADM 5.3:H 85/2003 |
Location | o862432703 |
DIGITAL FORMAT |
PDF (Portable Document Format) |
REPOSITORY | Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records |
Full Text | State of Arizona Janet Napolitano Governor of Arizona Betsey Bayless Director, Department of Administration Arizona Department of Administration HUMAN RESOURCES SYSTEM 2003 ANNUAL REPORT BETSEY BAYLESS DIRECTOR ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION 100 NORTH FIFTEENTH AVENUE, SUITE 401 PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007 PHONE (602) 542-1500 FAX (602) 542-2199 September, 2003 The Honorable Janet Napolitano Governor, State of Arizona The Honorable Ken Bennett President, Arizona State Senate The Honorable Franklin “Jake” Flake Speaker, Arizona House of Representatives 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Dear Governor Napolitano, President Bennett and Speaker Flake: It is my pleasure to share with you the 2003 Annual Report on the Arizona State Service Human Resources System. The format of this year’s report is very similar to that produced last year, providing you with meaningful data regarding the status of the State’s workforce and the operation of the State Human Resources System. We remain restricted in our ability to thoroughly analyze data of the workforce due to the inherent limitations of our current payroll/personnel system. However, we are anxiously looking forward to the new Human Resources Information Solution scheduled to be unveiled in January, 2004. We expect this new system will facilitate the collection and analysis of accurate and timely data for future reports and will assist us to be even more effective and efficient in managing our human resources. This report was prepared in the midst of a sluggish economic situation and severe financial constraints upon agency budgets, and an uncertainty as to when, and to what extent, the economy will recover. The State of Arizona is facing a serious challenge with less money available but a higher demand for state services. The state workforce is shrinking, state salaries continue to be significantly below the market, and 43% of the workforce has four years or less of experience. This is just a glimpse of the information that indicates the difficulty we are facing in attracting and retaining employees. We are hopeful that the information in this report will assist you when making your decisions regarding Arizona State government and its employees. Very truly yours, Betsey Bayless Director i Table of Contents Section and Title Page Number Table of Contents i Overview ii SECTION ONE – OVERVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCE OPERATIONS 1 State Human Resources Operations Profile 2 SECTION TWO – GENERAL EMPLOYMENT TRENDS 6 Table 1 Filled Salaried and Wage Positions 1997 – 2003 7 Table 2 Filled Salaried and Wage Positions by Agency 2001, 2002, and 2003 8 Table 3 Covered/Uncovered Filled Positions by Agency 2003 9 Table 4 Rank Order of All States by Ratio of State Employment to State Population 2000 10 Table 5 Ratio of All State Employment to State Population 2000 11 Table 6 Rank Order of All States by Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 12 Table 7 Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 13 SECTION THREE – EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 14 Table 8 Distribution of State Government Employees by Ethnic Group 2003 15 Table 9 Distribution of State Government Employees by Occupational Group 2003 16 Table 10 Changes in Salaried Employment by Race and Gender 1997 – 2003 17 Table 11 Changes in Salaried Employment of Minorities 1997 - 2003 17 Table 12 Minority Representation by Agency – Salaried Employees 2003 18 Table 13 Gender Representation by Agency – Salaried Employees 2002 19 SECTION FOUR – EMPLOYEE MOBILITY 20 Table 14 Changes in Separations by Wage & Salaried Employees 1997 - 2003 21 Table 15 Separation Rates of Covered, Salaried Employees by Agency 1997 - 2003 22 Table 16 Separations of Covered, Salaried Employees by Type by Agency 2003 23 Table 17 Most Populous Class Titles 2003 24 Table 18 Classes With The Highest Separation Rate 2003 24 SECTION FIVE – EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS 25 Table 19 Agency Comparison of Average Wages per Employee 1997 - 2002 26 Table 20 Total Overtime Costs by Agency 2001 – 2003 27 Table 21 Distribution of Overtime Costs by Agency 2003 28 Table 22 Average Sick Leave Use and Costs Per Employee by Agency 1997 - 2002 29 Table 23 Age Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 30 Table 24 Length of Service Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 31 Table 25 Employee Survey 1999 - 2002 32 Table 26 State Employees by County 2003 33 ii Overview Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) §41-763.01 requires the Director of the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) to provide a report to the Governor and the Legislature on the status of the state’s human resources and the operation of the state human resources system. The statute requires that the report include information on the following: • All state employees including employees of all executive, legislative and judicial branch agencies. • The number of employees affected by and reasons for turnover within state service. • Overtime pay requirements of all state agencies. • Other information as determined by the Director. In Arizona State government the majority of agencies are subject to the jurisdiction of the ADOA Human Resources System. However, there are 23 agencies that are not included in this System. These 23 agencies have been informally grouped into 11 separate human resources systems. Each system develops its own employment, compensation, attendance and leave, and employee relations policies and procedures. Table A identifies all of the human resources systems within Arizona State Government and the number of employees within each of these systems. Agency Appropriated Full-Time Equivalent Positions ADOA Human Resources System 31,127.7 Governor's Office Personnel System Governor's Office N/A Governor's Office of Equal Opportunity 19.0 Governor's Office of Strategic Planning & Budgeting 24.0 Board of Regents & Universities Personnel System Board of Regents 29.4 Arizona State University 6,977.5 Northern Arizona University 2,269.3 University of Arizona 6,239.1 Legislative Personnel System Auditor General's Office 228.0 House of Representatives 231.0* Joint Legislative Budget Committee 35.0 Legislative Council 54.0 Library & Archives 129.1 Senate 200.0* Community College Board Personnel System 13.0 Courts Personnel System Court of Appeals 140.5 Superior Court 199.0 Supreme Court 253.9 Department of Gaming Personnel System 75.0 Governmental Information Technology Agency Personnel System 21.0 Department of Public Safety Personnel System Law Enforcement Merit System Council 1.0 Public Safety, Department of 1,912.8 Public Safety Personnel Retirement System N/A Arizona Schools for the Deaf and Blind 623.4 State Compensation Fund 485.0* Office of Tourism 28.0 Source: Joint Legislative Budget Committee – Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriations Report. Numbers reflect FY03 appropriations. Items marked with an asterisk indicate that numbers of employees were solicited from the respective agency. The largest of the human resources systems within Arizona State Government is the ADOA Human Resources System, also known as the Arizona State Service. The ADOA Human Resources System and the Law Enforcement Merit System Council (the Department of Public Safety’s personnel system) are the State’s only merit systems established by statute. Merit system employees may only be separated from service for cause. Non-merit employees of the other systems serve at the pleasure of the appointing authorities and can be separated without the right of appeal. They are considered “at will” employees. The primary focus of this report is the ADOA Human Resources System. The report is comprised of five sections. Table A iii Section One provides an overview of the ADOA Human Resources Operations. The responsibility of the ADOA Human Resources Operations resides with the ADOA, Human Resources Division located at 100 North 15th Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. This section describes who receives services provided by the ADOA Human Resources Division, the services provided, the organization of the division, and functional highlights. Section Two provides demographic information of the employees within the ADOA Human Resources System. The demographic information includes filled salaried and wage positions, covered and uncovered filled positions by agency, state employment in relation to state population, and total state payroll in relation to state population. Section Three provides statistical information of the employees within the ADOA Human Resources System by race, gender and ethnic group. The statistical information includes distribution of employees by ethnic group compared to the Arizona Labor Force, distribution of employees by occupational group, trends in salaried employment by race and gender, trends in salaried employment of minorities, minority representation by agency of salaried employees, and gender representation by agency of salaried employees. Section Four provides data on the mobility patterns of the employees within the ADOA Human Resources System. The data in this Section includes the trends in the separations (turnover) by wage and salaried employees, trends in the separations of covered, salaried employees by agency, separations by reason by agency, most populous classes and the classes with the highest separation rates. Section Five provides information on employment characteristics. The majority of the information is presented by agency with five years of historical data. This section includes average covered employee wage, total overtime costs by agency, distribution of overtime costs by agency, average sick leave use and costs per employee, distribution of average age of employees, distribution of average length of service of employees, employee satisfaction survey results, and percentage of employees by county. The main source of the information presented in Sections Two through Five is the state’s Human Resources Management System (HRMS). This is a decentralized record-keeping and tracking database, and the accuracy of the data in the system is dependent upon the personnel in each of the state agencies to enter information into the system in a timely manner. Maintenance and reporting functions of the system reside within the authority of ADOA. The HRMS system captures information from roughly 100 different agencies, boards, and commissions that are included within the ADOA Human Resources System. Many of these organizations are quite small in size. For many of the tables contained herein, organizations with less than 50 allocated positions (at the end of fiscal year 2002) have been consolidated into one line item at the top of the table, noted as “small agencies”. In addition, the charts represent filled positions as of the date referenced when the reports were generated. Tables do not include vacant positions. Section One State Human Resources Operations Profile ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS State Human Resources Operations Profile The largest government human resources system in Arizona is managed by the Arizona Department of Administration, Human Resources Division. Established: 1968 as the Arizona Personnel Commission Location: 100 North 15th Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona Employees: 153.5 full-time positions Budget for FY 2004: $14,943,600 (ProRata), $5,362,212 (Health Insurance Trust Fund) Mission: …provide efficient, timely customer-driven professional human resources services… The Division consists of six functional areas: Benefits, Classification and Compensation, Employment, Satellite Offices/Employee Relations, Planning and Quality Assurance, and Consulting Services. Human Resources Director - Kathy Peckardt Benefits/Insurance - Susan Strickler, Manager Classification/Compensation - Joanne Carew, Manager Employment - Linda Herold, Manager Satellite Offices/Employee Relations - Laura Krause, Manager Planning and Quality Assurance – Greg Carmichael, Manager Human Resources Consulting – Denny Flaherty, Marie Isaacson, Claudia Smith, Clarence Williams Customer Base includes over 9,000 retirees and over 62,000 active employees from 100 state agencies, boards and commissions and 3 state universities. • Health and welfare agencies (e.g. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Economic Security, Health Services) • Protection and safety agencies (e.g. Adult and Juvenile Corrections) • Transportation agencies (e.g. Department of Transportation) • Inspection and regulation agencies (e.g. Board of Accountancy, Real Estate, Insurance and Medical Examiners) • Education agencies (e.g. Department of Education, State Universities1, Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind) • Natural resource agencies (e.g. Game and Fish, State Land, State Parks) • General government agencies (e.g. Revenue, Commerce) • State retirees1 Summary of Services • A benefits program is offered that includes medical, dental, vision, basic and supplemental life insurance, dependent life insurance, flexible spending accounts, short-term and long-term disability for active, benefit-eligible employees. • An on-site childcare center located on the capitol mall is available to state employees. • An Employee Assistance Program is available that offers counseling services and referral services. • Wellness Program is available that offers: o Health Education classes tailored to each individual worksite. o Free or low-cost screening programs. o An inter-agency wellness resource center with books, videos and audiotapes. o A monthly newsletter full of wellness information and a listing of upcoming events in worksites statewide. • Human resources professionals are located on-site within the eight largest state agencies. • A team of human resources professionals is dedicated solely to serving the 92 small and mid-sized agencies, to take advantage of economies of scale. • A centralized database of applicants is maintained for hiring supervisors to utilize to fill positions. • A pool of candidates is maintained to fill the temporary staffing needs of state agencies. • The recruitment strategy includes a variety of methods including coordinating and hosting job fairs and community events and participating in community outreach programs. • An up-to-date website www.hr.state.az.us is available containing information relating to job opportunities and employee benefits. • Consulting services are offered to provide human resources expertise in such areas as employment law and Arizona State government rules, policies and practices. • Market surveys are conducted annually and outside salary surveys are utilized to evaluate market position of state jobs to ensure external competitiveness. • Jobs are analyzed and evaluated to determine appropriate salary ranges and job classifications to ensure internal equity. 1 These customers utilize the services of the Benefits Program only. 3 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS An example of the Arizona Healthways newsletter Benefits The Benefits section fulfills the statutory responsibility to provide health and welfare benefits to the State of Arizona employees, retirees, long-term disability recipients, COBRA participants and their eligible dependents. The “Saguaro Program” brand was selected to identify the ADOA benefits from other benefit programs offered to employees and retirees within the state of Arizona. The Saguaro Program is comprehensive and consists of medical, dental, vision, basic life, supplemental life, dependent life, short-term disability, long-term disability, and flexible spending accounts. Although recent comparisons have not been conducted, a 1998 study by Watson & Wyatt indicated that the State’s employee benefits were competitive with other large Arizona employers. The table below provides a breakdown of the enrollment for each of the program components for the October 2002 through September 2003 plan year. Benefit Enrollment The Benefits section also offers a Wellness Program. The Wellness Program provides services at no or low cost in order to improve the health and wellness of our employees. This program is available for employees and families who work for the State of Arizona. Retirees of the State of Arizona (and their spouses) are also welcome to use wellness resources. The program includes publishing a health newsletter Arizona Healthways, workshops/training, a library of materials, flu shots, and mammography, osteoporosis, and stroke risk assessment screenings. As we move forward into the future, wellness will become a vital function to educate and promote preventative measures to reduce health care claims costs. Diabetes screening, disease prevention classes, and disease management will be necessary to incorporate into the wellness program. The following table provides data regarding the number of services provided for the past three years. Wellness Data Another component of the Benefits section includes the Employee Assistance Program (EAP). EAP offers counseling services, referral services and management/employee workshops. The types of workshops offered include EAP Service Introductions and Crisis Debriefing. The table below provides information for the past two years regarding the number and types of issues where intervention was provided. EAP Services Service 2001 2002 2003 Phone Contacts 5,301 3,681 3,980 Referrals 3,690 3,183 3,412 Counseled 634 553 586 Substance Abuse 101 58 92 Psychological 74 38 40 Physical/Medial 38 27 19 Legal 49 38 24 Work Related 168 182 201 Financial 92 84 50 Marriage/Family 112 126 160 In-Service/Crisis Sessions 42 65 72 Represented Agencies 350 385 320 Plan Enrollment Percent Basic Life 61,527 100% Medical 52,766 85.8% Dental 53,106 86.3% Vision 42,408 68.9% Short-Term Disability 25,102 40.8% Long-Term Disability 57,220 93% Supplemental Life 30,359 49.3% Dependent Life 31,167 50.7% Medical FSA* 3,840 6.2% Dependent FSA* 719 1.2% * Flexible Spending Accounts do not include university employees Service 2000 2001 2002 2003 Classes/Screenings 935 1,324 1,360 1,316 Employees Attending 35,007 41,840 42,205 42,229 Flu Shots Administered 12,799 14,147 15,421 14,564 Flu Shot Worksites 229 282 306 307 WeightWatchers Sessions 111 135 137 48 Employees Attending 3,045 3,828 4,080 3,489 Pounds Lost 18,978 23,339 23,689 19,296 Mammography Screenings 370 546 631 815 Referred to doctor 28 44 59 45 Osteoporosis Screenings 630 734 666 700 Abnormal 173 194 149 122 4 Source of Resumes 5,041 4,847 11,834 4,936 4,085 3,988 3,487 15,235 11,800 9,111 5,685 3,139 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY03 Internet Newspapers Mail/Other Classification & Compensation The Classification/Compensation section administers job evaluations and compensation programs for the ADOA Human Resources System while maintaining internal and external equity. In addition, this section conducts and/or participates in salary benefit studies, evaluates covered and uncovered positions using the whole job classification method, determines FLSA designation for all positions, prepares the annual salary recommendation, and administers and interprets salary policy. The number of positions that were established or reclassified declined this past year, while the number that were abolished continued to increase. The increasing number of abolishment of positions is in large part the result of a “clean up” of data necessary for the conversion to a new personnel system, the Human Resources Information Solution (HRIS). Number of Classification Actions 948 1,426 868 1,771 1,751 764 964 1,713 1,986 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 FY 01 FY 02 FY03 Established Reclassified Abolished Employment The Employment Section maintains a centralized applicant database, provides training and conducts informational sessions for agency staffing professionals, manages community outreach, coordinates/hosts job fairs and community events, manages turnover data and manages temporary services. The following graphic highlights some of the sources of resumes. The use of the Internet as a source has grown over the past years, while more traditional sources such as newspapers have remained stable and mail has significantly declined. Satellite Offices The Division has nine satellite offices that provide professional human resources services to state agencies. Eight large agencies, Department of Administration, Department of Corrections, Department of Economic Security, Department of Health Services, Department of Juvenile Corrections, Department of Revenue, Department of Transportation and AHCCCS have an on-site human resources office dedicated to the agency. The remaining 92 agencies are provided dedicated human resources services through the Capitol Mall Personnel Office. State agencies with branches in Tucson, also have a dedicated human resources office providing services to all state agencies. These offices provide a myriad of services including: rule interpretation, consistency in human resources practices, compliance with laws, rules, policies and procedures, recruitment/staffing, employee relations, operations, classification/organization consultation and consultation regarding human resources-related issues. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 4th Level Grievances 48 33 47 36 51 0 20 40 60 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Employee Relations This section provides rule interpretation to agency human resources professionals, management and employees, assistance with policy development; guidance on employee relations issues, investigates and prepares responses to 4th level grievances submitted by agency employees and 3rd level grievances submitted by ADOA employees, and investigates and prepares recommendations in response to requests for 2nd level classification reviews. The following graphic provides information on the number of 4th level grievances processed by the Employee Relations section for the past five years. Planning & Quality Assurance This section was established to assist State agencies in reviewing their policies, practices and procedures to ensure consistent human resources practices are maintained throughout Arizona State Government. The section also provides data analysis of key human resources information and focuses on strategic planning and best practices research which will assist the Division in becoming proactive partners with its customers. Consulting Services This area provides both in-house and external services regarding various human resources related issues, such as, pending and/or changes to existing legislation, inquiries from the public, legislature and other state agencies, design, development and oversight of pilot programs and special projects. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Two General Employment Trend ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . the total number of state employees dropped to 37,293 – less than were 7 employed in 1999 . . . 30,000 32,000 34,000 36,000 38,000 40,000 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Wage Salaried Table 1 - Filled Salaried and Wage Positions 1997 - 2003 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 1999 data represents calendar year-end (Jan – Dec); 2000 through 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees, including covered and uncovered employees. Wage employees are those employees who are hired on a temporary basis and earn an hourly wage. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: The total number of filled positions declined for the first time in the past six years. The bulk of the state’s workforce is composed of salaried positions, and last year those numbers decreased by 2.4%. The number of wage positions decreased even more (15%) resulting in a total decline of the workforce of over 3%. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . once again, the majority of state agencies experienced a decline in their 8 workforce . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 2 - Filled Salaried and Wage Positions by Agency 2001, 2002, and 2003 Agency Name 2001 2002 2003 Salary Wage Salary Wage Salary Wage Small Agencies 648 319 678 309 686 319 Administration 947 34 925 37 867 32 Agriculture 340 29 315 23 313 37 AHCCCS 1,305 9 1,379 7 1,281 1 Attorney General 711 60 721 54 594 44 Banking Department 50 1 51 1 50 0 Building & Fire Safety 70 0 66 0 52 0 Coliseum & Exposition 43 0 41 0 44 0 Commerce 134 1 104 0 89 0 Corporation Commission 275 11 275 7 288 10 Corrections 9,754 95 9,298 36 9,395 31 Economic Security 9,025 819 9,811 741 9,261 538 Education 365 20 378 11 393 12 Environmental Quality 743 48 726 24 724 10 Game & Fish 528 108 532 123 554 126 Health Services 1,728 97 1,756 92 1,797 103 Historical Society 77 14 72 14 66 10 Industrial Commission 295 5 283 8 280 9 Insurance Dept 133 3 142 1 144 1 Juvenile Corrections 1,217 21 1,076 14 1,094 11 Land Dept 180 40 187 48 167 51 Lottery Commission 110 14 105 12 108 8 Medical Examiners Board 58 21 55 20 53 22 Military Affairs 409 85 410 97 408 109 Pioneers Home 106 35 103 30 106 26 Racing 40 24 37 23 31 26 Real Estate 65 0 65 0 56 1 Registrar of Contractors 137 0 134 0 143 0 Retirement System 149 12 163 7 168 7 Revenue 1,009 14 982 16 1,034 16 State Parks 284 64 282 49 267 66 Transportation 4,581 414 4,689 311 4,478 165 Veterans Service 267 18 276 12 280 11 Water Resources 232 38 229 33 201 19 Totals 36,015 2,473 36,346 2,160 35,472 1,821 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. All data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees, including covered and uncovered employees. Wage employees are those employees who are hired on a temporary basis and earn an hourly wage. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: The majority (over 60%) of state agencies (excluding the small agencies) remained the same or experienced a decrease in the number of filled positions. Twelve agencies experienced decreases of over 5%, including six agencies that had double-digit reductions. Overall the state experienced a 3.15% reduction in workforce. . . . over 87% of employees in the ADOA Human Resources System are 9 covered by the state merit system . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 3 – Covered/Uncovered Filled Positions by Agency 2003 Small Agencies 2.6% Administration 2.2% Agriculture 10.9% AHCCCS 3.4% Attorney General 2.0% Banking Department 2.2% Building & Fire Safety 0.5% Coliseum & Exposition 7.1% Commerce -0.1% Corporation Commission 5.3% Corrections 0.2% Economic Security 0.6% Education 0.5% Environmental Quality 3.0% Game & Fish 1.1% Health Services 2.4% Historical Society -1.3% Industrial Commission 1.8% Insurance Dept 4.5% Juvenile Corrections 2.9% Land Dept -0.7% Lottery Commission 1.3% Medical Examiners Board 3.6% Military Affairs 7.7% Pioneers Home 1.9% Racing 7.4% Real Estate -0.9% Registrar of Contractors 2.7% Retirement System 0.9% Revenue 0.4% State Parks -7.8% Transportation 0.2% Veterans Service Comm 2.4% Water Resources 0.8% TOTAL 0.9% Source: The state’s Human Resources Management System. Table includes all salaried positions (full-time and part-time). The distinction is made between “covered” employees (employees in positions covered by the ADOA personnel rules) and “uncovered” employees (employees in positions not covered by the ADOA personnel rules). Comments: Over 87% of the workforce in the ADOA Human Resources System is covered by the merit system. Twenty-seven out of the thirty-three larger agencies (82%) have the majority of their employees covered by the merit system. Increase in % of Uncovered from FY 02 to FY 03 87.1% 68.7% 65.4% 89.5% 87.3% 80.0% 9.5% 84.6% 83.9% 71.0% 18.9% 79.6% 96.4% 88.9% 66.7% 92.5% 81.8% 87.5% 95.3% 75.3% 60.3% 97.1% 96.6% 57.3% 33.7% 63.6% 90.4% 88.0% 32.8% 82.0% 30.0% 64.6% 45.5% 12.9% 31.3% 34.6% 10.5% 12.7% 20.0% 90.5% 15.4% 16.1% 29.0% 81.1% 20.4% 11.1% 33.3% 7.5% 18.2% 12.5% 24.7% 39.7% 42.7% 66.3% 36.4% 9.6% 12.0% 67.2% 18.0% 70.0% 35.4% 54.5% 97.2% 100% 3.6% 4.7% 2.9% 3.4% 2.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Covered Uncovered . . . Arizona ranks 43rd in the nation in the ratio of state employees to total 10 population . . . Table 4 - Rank Order of All States by Ratio of State Employment to State Population 2000 1...............Hawaii 2...............Alaska 3...............Delaware 4...............New Mexico 5...............North Dakota 6...............Wyoming 7...............Vermont 8...............Utah 9...............Louisiana 10.............Montana 11.............South Carolina 12.............Mississippi 13.............Connecticut 14.............Washington 15.............Iowa 16.............Oklahoma 17.............Rhode Island 18.............Kentucky 19.............Arkansas 20.............Alabama 21.............South Dakota 22.............West Virginia 23.............Idaho 24.............Nebraska 25.............Maryland 26.............Virginia 27.............Missouri 28.............Maine 29.............Kansas 30.............New Jersey 31.............Oregon 32.............North Carolina 33.............Colorado 34.............New Hampshire 35.............Massachusetts 36.............Minnesota 37.............Georgia United States Average 38.............Michigan 39.............Tennessee 40.............Indiana 41.............New York 42.............Texas 43........ Arizona 44.............Pennsylvania 45.............Ohio 46.............Wisconsin 47.............Florida 48.............Nevada 49.............California 50.............Illinois Source: State Employment data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Employment refers to all persons gainfully employed by and performing services for a state government. Employees include all persons paid for personal services performed, including persons paid from Federally funded programs, paid elected or appointed officials, persons in a paid leave status, and persons paid on a per meeting, annual, semiannual, or quarterly basis. Unpaid officials, pensioners, persons whose work is performed on a fee basis, and contractors and their employees are excluded from the count of employees. Comments: Arizona ranks 43rd in the nation in the ratio of state employees as compared to overall population of the state. Of the Western States, only California and Nevada have fewer employees as compared to overall population of the state. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . of the Western states, only California and Nevada have fewer employees 11 than Arizona for the population served. . . Table 5 - Ratio of All State Employment to State Population 2000 Employees per 10,000 Population Source: State Employment data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Employment refers to all persons gainfully employed by and performing services for a state government. Employees include all persons paid for personal services performed, including persons paid from Federally funded programs, paid elected or appointed officials, persons in a paid leave status, and persons paid on a per meeting, annual, semiannual, or quarterly basis. Unpaid officials, pensioners, persons whose work is performed on a fee basis, and contractors and their employees are excluded from the count of employees. Comments: Arizona ranks 43rd in the nation, and 9th out of the 11 Western states in the ratio of state employees as compared to overall population of the state. NV 112 UT 221 AZ 126 CA 105 CO 153 NM 263 OR 156 ID 175 WY 227 MT 199 WA 191 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . Arizona ranks 47th in the nation when comparing total payroll to the 12 state’s population. . . Table 6 - Rank Order of All States by Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 1...............Alaska 2...............Hawaii 3...............Delaware 4...............Connecticut 5...............New Mexico 6...............Vermont 7...............Rhode Island 8...............North Dakota 9...............Iowa 10.............Washington 11.............New Jersey 12.............Utah 13.............Louisiana 14.............Wyoming 15.............Montana 16.............Colorado 17.............Maryland 18.............Massachusetts 19.............Kentucky 20.............South Carolina 21.............Minnesota 22.............Mississippi 23.............Virginia 24.............Oklahoma 25.............Arkansas 26.............Michigan 27.............New York 28.............Idaho 29.............Oregon 30.............Alabama United States Average 31.............West Virginia 32.............Maine 33.............South Dakota 34.............Kansas 35.............North Carolina 36.............New Hampshire 37.............California 38.............Wisconsin 39.............Missouri 40.............Nebraska 41.............Georgia 42.............Pennsylvania 43.............Indiana 44.............Texas 45.............Tennessee 46.............Ohio 47........ Arizona 48.............Nevada 49.............Florida 50.............Illinois Source: State Payroll data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Data in these files are based on information obtained in the Annual Survey of Government Employment and Payroll. Approximately one-half of the state governments provided data from central payroll records for all or most of their agencies/institutions. Data for agencies and institutions for the remaining state governments were obtained by mail canvass questionnaires. Comments: Arizona ranks 47th in the ratio of total state payroll as compared to overall population of the state. Of the Western States, only Nevada has a lower ratio of total state payroll compared to the overall population of the state. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . of the Western states, only Nevada’s payroll is less than Arizona’s when 13 compared to the state’s population. . . Table 7 - Ratio of Total State Payroll to State Population 2000 Dollars per Citizen Source: State Payroll data from U.S. Census Bureau, Governments Division. March 2000. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. April 2000. Data in these files are based on information obtained in the Annual Survey of Government Employment and Payroll. Approximately one-half of the state governments provided data from central payroll records for all or most of their agencies/institutions. Data for agencies and institutions for the remaining state governments were obtained by mail canvass questionnaires. Comments: Arizona ranks 47th in the ratio of total state payroll as compared to overall population of the state. Of the Western States, only Nevada has a lower ratio of total state payroll compared to the overall population of the state. NV $36.86 UT $60.64 AZ $36.90 CA $44.62 CO $56.34 NM $72.03 OR $48.88 ID $49.53 WY $57.59 MT $56.57 WA $63.31 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Three Equal Employment ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the state’s workforce is more diverse than the available labor force within 15 Arizona . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS White 75.6% African American 2.6% Hispanic 16.8% Asian 1.5% Native American 3.5% White 64.2% African American 6.9% Hispanic 23.8% Asian 2.1% Native American 2.9% Table 8 – Distribution of State Government Employees by Ethnic Group 2003 Source: The Governor’s Office of Equal Opportunity, Arizona State Workforce Distribution Chart, June 2003. Comments: The majority of the state’s workforce is comprised of Whites, and Hispanics. Overall, the state government’s workforce is more diverse than the available labor force. State Government Employees Arizona Labor Force . . . the professional occupational group accounts for the largest portion of the 16 workforce . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 9 – Distribution of State Government Employees by Occupational Group 2003 Source: The Governor’s Office of Equal Opportunity, Arizona State Workforce Distribution Chart, June 2003. Categories are based upon the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Occupational Categories for State and Local Government (EEO-4). Comments: State employees categorized as professionals comprise the largest percentage (42%) of the eight occupational groupings. Skilled craft (2%) and service workers (4%) encompass the smallest percentage. Officials & Administrators 6.7% Professionals 42.4% Technicians 5.5% Paraprofessionals 10.5% Service 4.1% Skilled Craft 1.6% Office & Clerical 8.7% Protective Services 20.4% . . . the percentage of minorities has steadily increased over the years . . . 17 Table 10 - Changes in Salaried Employment by Race and Gender 1997 - 2003 Non-Minority Minority Total Year Male Female Male Female Male Female Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1997 11,801 34.9% 11,409 33.7% 4,450 13.2% 6,178 18.3% 16,251 48.0% 17,587 52.0% 1998 11,731 34.3% 11,349 33.2% 4,679 13.7% 6,454 18.9% 16,410 48.0% 17,803 52.0% 1999 11,868 34.0% 11,439 32.7% 4,885 14.0% 6,758 19.3% 16,753 47.9% 18,197 52.1% 2000 11,732 33.4% 11,447 32.6% 4,962 14.1% 6,942 19.8% 16,694 47.6% 18,389 52.4% 2001 11,732 33.4% 11,447 32.6% 4,962 14.1% 6,942 19.8% 16,694 47.6% 18,389 52.4% 2002 11,483 32.0% 11,660 32.4% 5,147 14.3% 7,645 21.3% 16,630 46.3% 19,305 53.7% 2003 11,187 31.5% 11,322 31.9% 5,447 15.4% 7,505 21.2% 16,634 46.9% 18,827 53.1% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 1997 through 1999 data compiled in December; 2000 through 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: The percentage of minority male employees continued a gradual increase, while the number of minority female employees remained the same. Table 11 - Changes in Salaried Employment of Minorities 1997 - 2003 African-American Hispanic Others Year Male Female Male Female Male Female Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1997 866 2.6% 1,339 4.0% 3,020 8.9% 3,939 11.6% 564 1.7% 900 2.7% 1998 914 2.7% 1,388 4.1% 3,168 9.3% 4,139 12.1% 597 1.7% 927 2.7% 1999 935 2.7% 1,422 4.1% 3,310 9.5% 4,355 12.5% 640 1.8% 981 2.8% 2000 938 2.7% 1,441 4.1% 3,376 9.6% 4,501 12.8% 648 1.8% 1,000 2.8% 2001 938 2.7% 1,441 4.1% 3,376 9.6% 4,501 12.8% 648 1.8% 1,000 2.8% 2002 950 2.6% 1,517 4.2% 3,525 9.8% 5,036 14.0% 672 1.9% 1,092 3.0% 2003 1,279 3.6% 1,493 4.2% 3,475 9.8% 4,941 13.9% 693 2.0% 1,071 3.0% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 1997 through 1999 data compiled in December; 2000 through 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. Comments: Over the past six years, the number of minority employees in all classes has increased or remained relatively stable. This past year, the largest increase was observed in the percentage of male African-Americans. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . minorities comprise over 36% of the employees in the ADOA Human 18 Resources system . . . Table 12 – Minority Representation by Agency Salaried Employees 2003 Small Agencies Administration Agriculture AHCCCS Attorney General Banking Department Building & Fire Safety Commerce Corporation Commission Corrections Economic Security Education Environmental Quality Game & Fish Health Services Historical Society Industrial Commission Insurance Dept Juvenile Corrections Land Dept Lottery Commission Medical Examiners Board Military Affairs Pioneers Home Racing Real Estate Registrar of Contractors Retirement System Revenue State Parks Transportation Veterans Service Comm Water Resources TOTAL Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. Comments: The table above shows the proportion of minority employees of each of the large state agencies. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 15.9% 43.9% 36.7% 15.8% 39.1% 24.6% 21.0% 19.6% 21.9% 16.0% 38.1% 10.9% 27.5% 12.2% 38.0% 19.7% 44.1% 10.6% 32.2% 9.7% 25.4% 24.5% 45.2% 34.3% 26.7% 20.5% 15.4% 13.2% 21.9% 42.1% 31.8% 34.0% 41.2% 84.1% 56.1% 63.3% 84.2% 60.9% 75.4% 79.0% 80.4% 78.1% 84.0% 61.9% 89.1% 72.5% 87.8% 62.0% 80.3% 55.9% 89.4% 67.8% 90.3% 74.6% 75.5% 54.8% 65.7% 73.3% 79.5% 84.6% 86.8% 78.1% 57.9% 68.2% 66.0% 58.8% 36.5% 63.5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Minorities White . . . females comprise over 53% of the workforce in the ADOA Human 19 Resources system . . . Table 13 – Gender Representation by Agency Salaried Employees 2003 Small Agencies Administration Agriculture AHCCCS Attorney General Banking Department Building & Fire Safety Commerce Corporation Commission Corrections Economic Security Education Environmental Quality Game & Fish Health Services Historical Society Industrial Commission Insurance Dept Juvenile Corrections Land Dept Lottery Commission Medical Examiners Board Military Affairs Pioneers Home Racing Real Estate Registrar of Contractors Retirement System Revenue State Parks Transportation Veterans Service Comm Water Resources TOTAL Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. Percentages are based upon all full- and part-time salaried employees responding – a small percentage of employees choose not to disclose their ethnicity. 2003 data compiled in July. Table includes both covered and uncovered employees. Comments: Nineteen of the thirty-three agencies (58%) have over 50% females representing their workforce. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS 50.2% 74.3% 42.2% 43.1% 61.4% 60.9% 48.3% 60.7% 34.4% 67.0% 23.2% 65.5% 52.3% 40.7% 45.6% 62.5% 65.6% 60.6% 62.8% 35.3% 48.4% 73.3% 74.9% 34.4% 52.1% 65.2% 38.5% 52.8% 65.7% 77.4% 36.7% 48.1% 48.7% 49.8% 25.7% 57.8% 56.9% 38.6% 39.1% 51.7% 39.3% 65.6% 33.0% 76.8% 34.5% 47.7% 59.3% 54.4% 37.5% 34.4% 39.4% 37.2% 64.7% 51.6% 26.7% 25.1% 65.6% 47.9% 34.8% 61.5% 47.2% 34.3% 22.6% 63.3% 51.9% 51.3% 53.4% 46.6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Females Males Section Four Employee Mobility ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the separation rate for covered salaried employees (15.4%) has returned to 21 historic levels . . . Table 14 - Changes in Separations from State Service by Wage and Salaried Employees 1997 - 2003 Retirements Resignations Terminations Other Total Turnover Year Total Employees Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Wage 2,360 11 0.5% 327 13.9% 58 2.5% 735 31.1% 1,131 47.9% Covered 31,942 334 1.0% 3,301 10.3% 732 2.3% 342 1.1% 4,709 14.7% 1997 Uncovered 1,960 20 1.0% 318 16.2% 45 2.3% 59 3.0% 442 22.6% Wage 2,248 19 0.8% 363 16.1% 54 2.4% 820 36.5% 1,256 55.9% 1998 Covered 32,261 273 0.8% 3,332 10.3% 712 2.2% 282 0.9% 4,599 14.3% Uncovered 2,193 16 0.7% 197 9.0% 23 1.0% 44 2.0% 280 12.8% Wage 2,344 7 0.3% 374 16.0% 66 2.8% 787 33.6% 1,234 52.6% 1999 Covered 32,306 323 1.0% 3,692 11.4% 835 2.6% 298 0.9% 5,148 15.9% Uncovered 2,761 20 0.7% 273 9.9% 52 1.9% 86 3.1% 431 15.6% Wage 2,308 13 0.6% 407 17.6% 81 3.5% 861 37.3% 1,362 59.0% 2000 Covered 32,072 309 1.0% 3,904 12.2% 838 2.6% 244 0.8% 5,295 16.5% Uncovered 3,469 18 0.5% 397 11.4% 63 1.8% 72 2.1% 550 15.9% Wage 2,473 8 0.3% 245 9.9% 57 2.3% 506 20.5% 816 33.0% 2001 Covered 31,957 267 0.8% 3,647 11.4% 717 2.2% 233 0.7% 4,864 15.2% Uncovered 4,058 24 0.6% 434 10.7% 69 1.7% 57 1.4% 584 14.4% Wage 2,160 7 0.3% 120 5.6% 45 2.1% 390 18.1% 562 26.0% 2002 Covered 31,986 249 0.8% 2,897 9.1% 638 2.0% 292 0.9% 4,076 12.7% Uncovered 4,360 19 0.4% 284 6.5% 67 1.5% 63 1.4% 433 9.9% Wage 2,055 20 0.3% 224 10.9% 72 3.5% 873 42.5% 1,189 57.9% 2003 Covered 31,828 523 1.6% 3,323 10.4% 629 2.0% 423 1.3% 4,898 15.4% Uncovered 4,589 92 2.0% 412 9.0% 109 2.4% 142 3.1% 755 16.5% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 1999 data represents calendar year-end (Jan – Dec); 2000 through 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees, including covered and uncovered employees. Wage employees are those employees who are hired on a temporary basis and earn an hourly wage. This table represents filled positions only – it does not include vacant positions. The information reflected herein for separation rates may be different than the data reported previously based on a change in methodology used to gather the information for this report. Comments: In all three categories (wage, covered-salaried, and uncovered-salaried) separation rates have returned to levels last seen in 2001. The average separation rate for all categories combined was 17.8% last year. Among covered, salaried employees, resignations remain the leading category of separations. The relative percentage of retirements of covered and uncovered, salaried employees has increased to the highest levels experienced in the past seven years. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the majority of state agencies experienced an increase in separation 22 rates . . . Table 15 – Separation Rates of Covered, Salaried Employees by Agency 1997 – 2003 Agency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Small Agencies 11.2% 18.5% 14.9% 15.2% 14.3% 22.4% 16.0% Administration 13.4% 12.5% 14.7% 15.8% 17.6% 14.4% 15.2% Agriculture 12.0% 10.3% 12.2% 18.1% 21.9% 20.2% 12.9% AHCCCS 3.3% 9.9% 13.4% 12.2% 15.9% 11.5% 15.3% Attorney General 15.9% 13.8% 13.5% 17.3% 20.4% 13.5% 21.1% Banking Department 7.3% 4.7% 2.1% 6.5% 13.6% 2.2% 8.8% Building & Fire Safety 8.7% 13.1% 13.1% 15.6% 15.4% 5.0% 21.0% Commerce 49.5% 15.6% 19.1% 14.5% 8.6% 2.9% 3.2% Corporation Commission 13.4% 0.0% 10.3% 14.5% 11.4% 8.7% 12.3% Corrections 19.5% 16.4% 16.7% 20.4% 17.7% 17.2% 17.7% Economic Security 16.2% 14.0% 16.1% 13.0% 10.7% 10.7% 13.7% Education 0.0% 20.7% 20.0% 18.2% 14.3% 14.8% 24.1% Environmental Quality 2.6% 8.0% 13.1% 15.5% 10.6% 8.1% 8.0% Game & Fish 1.7% 7.9% 11.4% 9.1% 9.7% 6.4% 6.3% Health Services 16.8% 17.2% 16.6% 18.4% 21.6% 9.1% 19.7% Historical Society 7.6% 39.3% 12.7% 23.3% 14.3% 17.2% 17.7% Industrial Commission 2.1% 9.0% 9.7% 14.6% 15.9% 4.1% 11.0% Insurance Dept 5.6% 11.8% 11.1% 15.7% 12.4% 11.9% 14.3% Juvenile Corrections 35.1% 17.3% 36.4% 29.9% 29.3% 24.0% 29.6% Land Dept 5.1% 10.3% 11.1% 16.5% 13.5% 3.4% 14.6% Lottery Commission 4.2% 16.9% 15.7% 9.1% 5.6% 7.1% 9.3% Medical Examiners Board 13.3% 34.6% 46.2% 50.0% 50.0% 400% 150.0% Military Affairs 10.2% 9.0% 14.5% 15.9% 13.7% 7.3% 14.1% Pioneers Home 9.9% 8.0% 17.6% 25.0% 21.0% 7.8% 15.8% Racing 0.0% 12.9% 12.1% 3.1% 9.4% 3.4% 19.2% Real Estate 5.5% 9.6% 7.5% 25.5% 13.0% 3.7% 20.2% Registrar of Contractors 4.0% 12.6% 8.0% 13.8% 10.7% 6.0% 2.5% Retirement System 7.8% 15.7% 31.3% 11.1% 8.7% 58.8% 6.1% Revenue 2.8% 12.1% 9.5% 12.6% 13.5% 4.9% 10.4% State Parks 6.5% 9.7% 10.7% 13.9% 10.2% 4.5% 9.1% Transportation 12.6% 11.9% 12.7% 12.9% 13.4% 10.8% 12.3% Veterans Service 20.7% 48.4% 49.7% 56.5% 49.5% 19.8% 23.0% Water Resources 3.7% 7.6% 7.9% 15.1% 11.9% 3.1% 14.7% Total 14.7% 14.3% 15.9% 16.5% 15.2% 12.7% 15.4% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 1999 data represents calendar year-end (Jan – Dec); 2000 through 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees; this table represents filled, covered positions only – it does not include uncovered or vacant positions. The information reflected herein for separation rates may be different than the data reported previously based on a change in methodology used to gather the information for this report. Comments: The rate of separations from state service appears to have returned to rates typical during the past few years. Twenty-six of the thirty-three larger agencies (79%) experienced an increase in separation rates. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . voluntary resignations were the most common reason for employees 23 leaving state service . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 16 - Separations of Covered, Salaried Employees by Type by Agency 2003 Agency Voluntary Involuntary Other Total Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Small Agencies 40 12.5% 4 1.3% 7 2.2% 51 16.0% Administration 72 12.2% 15 2.5% 3 0.5% 90 15.2% Agriculture 12 11.1% 2 1.8% 0 0.0% 14 12.9% AHCCCS 143 12.7% 29 2.6% 1 0.1% 173 15.3% Attorney General 33 14.2% 16 6.9% 0 0.0% 49 21.1% Banking Department 2 4.4% 1 2.2% 1 2.2% 4 8.8% Building & Fire Safety 9 17.1% 2 3.8% 0 0.0% 11 21.0% Commerce 1 3.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 3.2% Corporation Commission 17 9.9% 3 1.8% 1 0.6% 21 12.3% Corrections 1,442 15.9% 125 1.4% 43 0.5% 1,610 17.7% Economic Security 1,116 11.8% 181 1.9% 0 0.0% 1,297 13.7% Education 54 22.8% 3 1.3% 0 0.0% 57 24.1% Environmental Quality 41 7.3% 3 0.5% 1 0.2% 45 8.0% Game & Fish 31 6.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.4% 33 6.3% Health Services 241 15.1% 72 4.5% 1 0.1% 314 19.7% Historical Society 10 17.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10 17.7% Industrial Commission 22 8.4% 7 2.7% 0 0.0% 29 11.0% Insurance Dept 12 12.2% 2 2.0% 0 0.0% 14 14.3% Juvenile Corrections 261 25.4% 38 3.7% 5 0.5% 304 29.6% Land Dept 19 11.1% 6 3.5% 0 0.0% 25 14.6% Lottery Commission 6 7.0% 2 2.3% 0 0.0% 8 9.3% Medical Examiners Board 0 0.0% 2 150.0% 0 0.0% 2 150.0% Military Affairs 11 12.0% 2 2.2% 0 0.0% 13 14.1% Pioneers Home 14 13.8% 2 2.0% 0 0.0% 16 15.8% Racing 4 15.4% 1 3.8% 0 0.0% 5 19.2% Real Estate 8 16.1% 2 4.0% 0 0.0% 10 20.2% Registrar of Contractors 3 2.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 2.5% Retirement System 1 6.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 6.1% Revenue 67 8.5% 14 1.8% 1 0.1% 82 10.4% State Parks 20 8.6% 1 0.4% 0 0.0% 21 9.1% Transportation 418 9.9% 98 2.3% 4 0.1% 520 12.3% Veterans Service 31 16.2% 13 6.8% 0 0.0% 44 23.0% Water Resources 12 8.4% 9 6.3% 0 0.0% 21 14.7% Total 4,173 13.1% 655 2.1% 70 0.3% 4,898 15.4% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The majority of employees hired with the State of Arizona are considered salaried employees; this table represents filled, covered positions only – it does not include uncovered or vacant positions. The information reflected herein for separation rates may be different than the data reported previously based on a change in methodology used to gather the information for this report. Comments: Voluntary separations are the most common type of separation from state service, accounting for over 85% of separations this past year. . . . several classes have separation rates well above the average . . . 24 Table 17 – Most Populous Class Titles 2003 Class Title Number Corrections Officer II 5,312 Program Services Evaluators (I, II, III, IV) 2,435 Motor Vehicle Division Customer Service Rep 784 Customer Service Rep 718 Child Protective Services Spec III 711 Human Services Spec II 573 Corrections Sergeant 569 Administrative Assistant II 458 Habitation Technician II 401 Secretary 327 Program & Project Spec II 360 Clerk Typist II 250 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). The above table includes all employees (full-time, part-time, seasonal, limited, covered, uncovered, etc) Comments: The title of Corrections Officer II is by far the most populated class in the state, followed by Program Services Evaluator. After those two classes, the numbers of employees in any given class rapidly decreases. The top eight classes listed this year were also on the list of most populous classes last year. Table 18 –Classes With The Highest Separation Rates 2003 Class Title Separation Rate Special Agent 55.0% Youth Correctional Officer I 48.7% Residential Program Specialist I 47.1% Habitation Technician II 42.7% Mental Health Program Specialist II 37.9% ASH Security Officer I 35.0% Custodial Worker I 34.1% Correctional Registered Nursing Supervisor I 33.3% Correctional Registered Nurse 33.1% Nursing Assistant 32.6% Psychiatric Nurse II 32.4% Youth Correctional Sergeant 32.0% Source: The state's Human Resources Management System, Turnover Report PER201-08. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). Percentage turnover is based on the number of employees leaving the class divided by the number of employees in the class. Comments: Classes associated with the Correctional and Social Services industries have experienced the highest separation rates relative to the number of employees in their respective classes. Seven of the twelve classes identified were on last year’s list, including four of the top five. ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Five Employment Characteristics ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . the average annual wages for covered employees increased last year . . . 26 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 19 – Agency Comparison of Average Wages per Employee 1997 - 2002 Average Covered Employee Wages Agency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Small Agencies $24,622 $28,865 $29,535 $31,029 $31,814 $33,913 Administration $25,001 $28,638 $28,892 $28,331 $29,617 $30,848 Agriculture $23,675 $26,522 $27,793 $27,285 $29,275 $29,626 AHCCCS $23,034 $24,812 $25,698 $26,505 $24,524 $27,600 Attorney General $24,376 $29,993 $31,580 $31,634 $34,189 $33,950 Banking Department $27,329 $30,129 $31,525 $32,907 $34,867 $37,012 Building & Fire Safety $22,816 $24,150 $25,229 $26,580 $26,837 $28,696 Coliseum & Exposition $31,057 $36,999 $34,944 $36,345 $34,089 $34,015 Commerce $29,013 $32,992 $33,162 $33,929 $36,159 $39,004 Corporation Commission $26,061 $30,268 $30,013 $32,862 $34,941 $36,665 Corrections $25,481 $26,292 $28,205 $30,128 $30,837 $30,478 Economic Security $22,819 $24,563 $26,080 $26,815 $25,507 $28,934 Education $27,587 $28,895 $30,621 $31,766 $32,898 $33,615 Environmental Quality $28,207 $31,489 $32,869 $33,466 $33,386 $34,725 Game & Fish $27,163 $30,621 $31,352 $34,586 $35,364 $35,860 Health Services $25,211 $28,326 $29,389 $29,292 $30,930 $31,677 Historical Society $20,565 $21,943 $24,501 $26,305 $25,330 $25,444 Industrial Commission $24,178 $26,776 $27,243 $27,028 $29,548 $30,967 Insurance Dept $22,287 $28,244 $29,688 $29,416 $29,500 $32,121 Juvenile Corrections $23,045 $22,860 $25,791 $27,620 $29,849 $28,705 Land Dept $28,381 $34,516 $32,937 $33,723 $34,676 $39,210 Lottery Commission $22,119 $27,252 $28,961 $30,413 $31,828 $31,788 Medical Examiners Board $20,306 $23,562 $16,057 $23,494 $22,498 $25,591 Military Affairs $24,891 $26,545 $26,893 $28,249 $29,776 $30,554 Pioneers Home $18,746 $22,215 $21,353 $21,793 $23,899 $24,202 Racing $26,424 $28,303 $31,114 $32,862 $34,669 $37,619 Real Estate $23,243 $24,903 $26,294 $26,685 $26,448 $29,276 Registrar of Contractors $23,409 $28,849 $25,856 $29,567 $31,100 $32,036 Retirement System $26,075 $28,511 $28,558 $28,598 $28,456 $28,516 Revenue $23,025 $27,176 $27,379 $26,581 $27,433 $28,719 State Parks $24,924 $26,661 $27,065 $26,263 $29,405 $32,063 Transportation $27,132 $29,387 $28,996 $28,866 $28,973 $29,971 Veterans Service Comm $13,419 $19,035 $18,219 $19,492 $22,322 $24,774 Water Resources $28,351 $33,163 $33,804 $32,986 $37,154 $39,447 Overall Average $24,613 $26,608 $27,820 $28,725 $28,791 $30,174 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 2002 data compiled from actual dollars paid from calendar year end files. Figures above include wages, dollars added to base, overtime, payments for on-call, and any payments for leave. Figures do not include uncovered employees, employees in the “Executive” pay plan, or employees on leave without pay or on long-term disability. Comments: The average wages actually paid to covered state employees increased by 4.8% from last year. Much of this increase was due to a General Salary Adjustment that occurred in April, 2002. However, five agencies actually experienced a decrease in the average wage for their covered employees from 2001 to 2002. . . . the total costs for overtime expenditures has decreased the last 27 two years . . . ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 20 – Total Overtime Costs by Agency 2001 – 2003 Agency 2001 2002 2003 Small Agencies $65,711 $72,381 $87,133 Administration $248,041 $285,718 $393,815 Agriculture $222,665 $190,945 $239,197 AHCCCS $171,390 $136,330 $59,761 Attorney General $88,037 $25,917 $29,184 Banking Department $0 $182 $0 Building & Fire Safety $0 $0 $118 Coliseum & Exposition $600,613 $506,642 $484,657 Commerce $5,002 $65 $248 Corporation Commission $209,907 $192,246 $162,306 Corrections $13,799,385 $8,491,476 $6,174,851 Economic Security $7,273,024 $6,813,169 $3,853,731 Education $188,938 $104,882 $61,857 Environmental Quality $131,522 $100,002 $67,921 Game & Fish $82,790 $76,198 $85,462 Health Services $1,468,332 $1,392,952 $1,094,577 Historical Society $5,752 $5,617 $652 Industrial Commission $0 $100 $498 Insurance Dept $17,392 $328 $2,889 Juvenile Corrections $1,081,562 $605,062 $1,226,511 Land Dept $394,830 $291,957 $297,099 Lottery Commission $15,440 $6,799 $22,844 Medical Examiners Board $4,460 $4,453 $1,614 Military Affairs $315,922 $267,302 $341,902 Pioneers Home $27,222 $31,263 $6,104 Racing $3,498 $4,634 $4,783 Real Estate $0 $90 $427 Registrar of Contractors $1,254 $2,668 $1,997 Retirement System $16,080 $65,923 $17,378 Revenue $202,288 $187,638 $159,997 State Parks $58,007 $43,635 $70,357 Transportation $6,624,480 $6,107,385 $5,123,179 Veterans Service $487,262 $260,164 $164,980 Water Resources $3,116 $0 $151 Overall Average $33,813,922 $26,274,123 $20,238,180 Source: The state's financial system (Arizona Financial Information System). Data is based on a fiscal year basis (July 1 through June 30) after all corrections have been made at the close of the fiscal year. Expenses may be charged to prior “appropriation years” yet in general are illustrated in the year in which the expense occurred. Data includes all funding sources. Employees who were eligible for overtime (both FLSA-exempt and non-exempt) who actually received cash payment for overtime. Not included were employees (both FLSA exempt and non-exempt) who received compensatory time at the appropriate rate for their additional overtime hours worked. FLSA excluded personnel were not included in the calculations, nor were any agencies which compensated their employees for additional hours worked with compensatory time. Comments: Total overtime expenses last year declined by 23%, continuing the previous year’s decline of 22%. Seventeen agencies decreased spending on overtime, while sixteen agencies (plus the combined small agencies) increased their overtime expenditures. . . . five agencies account for 85% of the State’s total overtime expenses. . . 28 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 21 – Distribution of Overtime Costs by Agency 2003 Source: The state's financial system (Arizona Financial Information System). Data is based on a fiscal year basis (July 1 through June 30) after all corrections have been made at the close of the fiscal year. Expenses may be charged to prior “appropriation years” yet in general are illustrated in the year in which the expense occurred. Data includes all funding sources. Employees who were eligible for overtime (both FLSA-exempt and non-exempt) who actually received cash payment for overtime. Not included were employees (both FLSA exempt and non-exempt) who received compensatory time at the appropriate rate for their additional overtime hours worked. FLSA excluded personnel were not included in the calculations, nor were any agencies which compensated their employees for additional hours worked with compensatory time. Comments: Five agencies accounted for over 85% of the total overtime expenses last year. These same five agencies have accounted for the majority of overtime over the last three years. Corrections 30.5% Transportation 25.3% Juvenile Corrections 6.1% All Other Agencies 13.7% Economic Security 19.0% Health Services 5.4% . . . the average cost for sick leave increased by 10% last year . . . 29 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 22 – Average Sick Leave Use And Average Costs Per Employee by Agency 1997 – 2002 Avg Sick Leave Days Avg Sick Leave Costs Agency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Small Agencies 5.5 5.3 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.6 $677 $715 $800 $821 $833 $908 Administration 5.6 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 6.0 $660 $734 $758 $792 $813 $899 Agriculture 6.5 5.7 4.8 4.8 5.2 5.2 $683 $646 $559 $569 $641 $660 AHCCCS 6.8 6.4 6.9 7.1 6.6 7.4 $729 $723 $787 $846 $820 $979 Attorney General 5.1 6.3 5.6 5.9 5.5 5.6 $829 $1,094 $1,003 $1,080 $1,072 $1,105 Banking Department 6.3 6.0 6.7 6.2 6.5 4.3 $795 $858 $980 $943 $1,043 $687 Building & Fire Safety 5.2 6.6 7.0 6.8 7.6 10.5 $554 $737 $800 $794 $924 $1,329 Coliseum & Exposition 5.0 5.1 9.2 9.9 6.6 6.6 $622 $685 $1,266 $1,420 $953 $1,020 Commerce 6.0 5.9 4.6 3.9 4.4 5.3 $873 $908 $737 $628 $757 $985 Corporation Commission 4.7 5.1 4.9 5.8 6.3 5.7 $641 $743 $751 $904 $1,070 $988 Corrections 6.3 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.9 6.7 $662 $662 $707 $787 $849 $865 Economic Security 7.0 7.1 7.6 7.5 6.7 7.6 $686 $737 $817 $831 $779 $927 Education 6.9 8.4 6.3 5.8 5.1 6.6 $869 $1,090 $851 $824 $781 $1,060 Environmental Quality 6.6 6.7 7.6 7.7 7.1 7.7 $841 $910 $1,067 $1,112 $1,069 $1,208 Game & Fish 4.3 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.1 4.1 $497 $503 $555 $615 $575 $593 Health Services 6.4 6.9 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.5 $740 $841 $817 $850 $881 $946 Historical Society 5.1 4.3 6.1 6.6 5.5 7.0 $535 $485 $694 $787 $661 $870 Industrial Commission 6.2 7.1 7.0 6.3 5.8 7.1 $663 $803 $821 $739 $730 $938 Insurance Dept 4.4 5.2 5.6 5.3 4.7 5.4 $493 $641 $730 $740 $695 $871 Juvenile Corrections 5.0 4.8 5.3 6.2 6.5 6.8 $544 $540 $623 $785 $842 $914 Land Dept 6.2 6.8 6.0 5.6 6.3 6.2 $783 $897 $802 $788 $937 $963 Lottery Commission 4.7 5.5 6.5 8.2 5.7 5.7 $602 $735 $866 $1,130 $807 $852 Medical Examiners Board 4.7 5.1 3.2 4.5 4.5 3.3 $559 $670 $449 $691 $705 $560 Military Affairs 6.3 6.3 6.4 6.1 6.1 6.6 $652 $689 $718 $726 $768 $888 Pioneers Home 6.1 7.2 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.6 $503 $636 $618 $666 $704 $796 Racing 5.0 6.5 3.4 6.6 9.6 6.9 $569 $811 $439 $853 $1,363 $1,046 Real Estate 7.3 6.2 6.4 9.3 8.4 10.8 $838 $743 $790 $1,175 $1,071 $1,409 Registrar of Contractors 5.7 6.7 6.4 6.8 6.6 6.2 $613 $807 $786 $858 $881 $855 Retirement System 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 4.4 4.2 $672 $744 $801 $860 $724 $762 Revenue 6.7 6.5 7.1 7.3 7.0 7.2 $710 $738 $845 $890 $890 $975 State Parks 4.8 4.4 4.9 5.6 6.3 6.3 $526 $472 $542 $622 $788 $821 Transportation 6.8 6.6 6.7 6.5 6.3 6.7 $740 $736 $757 $780 $776 $864 Veterans Service Comm 4.1 5.4 4.8 4.4 4.4 5.6 $344 $501 $484 $487 $502 $660 Water Resources 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.7 5.7 6.7 $848 $910 $924 $1,052 $975 $1,228 Overall Average 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.7 6.5 6.8 $687 $723 $767 $814 $821 $907 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 1997 through 2002 data compiled from actual dollars paid for sick leave from calendar year end files. The calculation of average sick hours was determined by dividing the total dollars paid by the average hourly rate then dividing by the number of employees. Only employees who were eligible for, earned and used sick leave (both covered and uncovered, wage employees were excluded) were included in these calculations. Comments: The average cost of sick leave increased by over 10% last year. Since 1997, over 94% of agencies have experienced an increase in their average sick leave costs, averaging nearly 45% during that time period. . . . the average age of employees is 44.1 years . . . 30 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 23 – Age Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). Numbers are based upon all full- and part-time, covered and uncovered, salaried employees. Comments: The above chart shows the age distribution for all salaried employees. In 2003, the average age of a state employee was 44.1 years, and more employees were in the 45-49 and 50-54 age group than any other age group. In 1998, 42% of the workforce was over 50, whereas in 2003 only 36% of the workforce was over 50 years of age. In 1998 only 18% of the workforce was less than 35 years of age; however in 2003 24% was less than 35 years of age. The Council of State Governments (October 2002) reported a national average of 44.5 years for state employees, and 21 of the 40 other states reporting have an older workforce than Arizona. 0.1% 3.6% 8.6% 11.5%11.9% 13.8% 14.7%14.7% 12.5% 6.5% 2.0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% up to 19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65 and Age older 1998 2003 . . . over 65% of the state’s workforce has less than 10 years of experience. . . 31 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 24 – Length of Service Distribution for All Employees 1998 - 2003 Source: The state's Human Resources Management System. 2003 data represents fiscal year-end (July 1 – June 30). Numbers are based upon all full- and part-time, covered and uncovered, salaried employees. Comments: The above chart shows the length of service distribution for all state employees. The average length of service for the state was 8.1 years of service. The vast majority of state employees (over 43%) have been hired within the last 4 years, and almost 67% of employees have less than 10 years of service with the state. By way of comparison, the Council of State Governments (October 2002) reported a national average of 11.2 years of service for state employees, and 31 of the 37 other states reporting have more tenured employees than Arizona. 43.3% 23.4% 14.8% 10.1% 4.5% 2.7% 0.8% 0.2% 0.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 4 or less 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40 yrs+ Years of State Service 1998 2003 . . . overall job satisfaction has gradually decreased over the years . . . 32 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 25 – Employee Survey 1999 - 2002 Agree/Strongly Agree Statement 1999 2000 2001 2002 Overall, I am satisfied with my job. 72% 68% 68% 64% I understand clearly what is expected of me at work. 76% 78% 78% 75% I receive adequate feedback on my work. 59% 57% 57% 55% I have the proper tools and equipment to do my work. 60% 58% 57% 56% I receive recognition for my work when I deserve it. 50% 47% 47% 46% I have the opportunity to learn and do new things in my job. 65% 62% 62% 58% My agency supports my participation in training opportunities to improve my job skills. 63% 62% 59% 54% My agency supports my participation in education and professional development opportunities. 57% 56% 55% 48% My agency values my ideas on work-related problems. 48% 45% 45% 43% My agency has a good system in place for communicating necessary information to staff. 45% 43% 44% 43% Senior management (Assistant Director level and above) in my agency show care and concern for employees. 43% 38% 39% 37% Source: Governor’s Office of Excellence in Government. The statewide employee survey is typically administered in September- October. Surveys are distributed to the agencies and should provide a representative sampling of ALL employees, including wage and salaried; covered and uncovered. In 1999, roughly 10,000 surveys were collected, in 2002, nearly 20,000 were collected. Comments: There has been a gradual decrease in most indicators of employee satisfaction from 1999 through 2002. The decline is most evident in the areas of training and professional development opportunities. . . . most of the state’s workforce resides in Maricopa County . . . 33 ◄ BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 26 – State Employees by County 2003 Source: The state’s Human Resources Management System. Percentages indicate number of employees in the ADOA Human Resources System agencies as of fiscal year-end 2003. Comments: The majority of state employees reside in Maricopa county, followed by Pima and Pinal counties. These three counties account for over 82% of all state employees. 0.9% 2.1% 2.3% 1.9% 1.3% 0.2% 2.9% 62.7% 6.1% 13.5% 1.1% 1.2% 3.1% 0.1% 0.5% Front and Back Cover Photography by Human Resources employee Ed Miksch |