EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION & HR PRACTICES IN PORK PRODUCTION Report

Transcription

1 EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION & HR PRACTICES IN PORK PRODUCTION 6-7 Report

2 7 Pork Board, Des Moines, IA, USA. This message funded by America s Pork Producers and the Pork Checkoff.

3 Table of Contents Section I: Introduction.... Introduction.... Contributor Profile...5. Key Findings...6. What s Changed...7 Section : Analysis...8. Compensation...8 Animal Caretaker Wages Average Annual Salary / Wage Ranges Bonus / Incentive Plans. Benefits...5 Vacation / Sick / PTO / Holidays Benefits by Employee Category Employee & Family Members Coverage. HR Management... Average Number of Hours Worked per Week Weekend Work Schedule Workforce Diversity Turnover Performance Appraisals Motivation Tactics. Recruitment...9 Recruiting Methods - Manager Recruiting Methods - Animal Caretaker Difficult-to-Fill Positions International Recruitment 5. Part-Time Staff...5 Number of Part-Time Staff Average Hourly Wage Average Number of Hours Worked per Week 6. Worker Safety...58

4 Introduction In the fall of 6, the National Pork Board commissioned AgCareers.com to conduct the Compensation and HR Practices in Pork Production survey. AgCareers.com conducted a similar version of the survey in on behalf of the National Pork Board. The 6 survey would provide an update to current pay and practice trends occurring within the industry since. Pork producers were categorized into two target groups, large producers and small to mid-size producers. For the purpose of this survey, the large producers audience represents farms with 5, or more sows in production. The second audience, small to mid-size producers, represents producers of a significant size that employ full-time employees other than family members. Small to mid-size producers are defined as those operations with less than 5, sows in production or over, head finishing. A customized online survey was created for each target audience. Requests to complete surveys were sent to 8 large producers and,99 small to mid-size operations. The number of participants completing the survey in both target audiences increased as compared to the survey. Twenty-nine large producers (76%) completed the survey. Two hundred and fifty-two small to mid-size producers (%) completed the survey. Topics covered in both surveys included Compensation, Benefits, HR Management, Recruitment, Part-Time Staff, and Safety. The overall survey was conducted to provide an accurate reflection of compensation and human resources practices that can be used within the pork industry to help recruit talent and ensure current practices are in-line with competition. Data was captured via direct communication with the target audiences through an online survey. The information was then collated and is presented in the following document. This document provides key findings, analysis commentary and detailed results from collated data of the small to mid-size operations survey and the large operations survey. Data was not combined as the number of small to mid-size producers responding heavily outweighed the number of large producers, however, the large survey respondents represent more employees within the industry overall. The Compensation and HR Practices in Pork Production Survey analysis has been compiled using data which, to the best of AgCareers.com and the National Pork Board s knowledge and information at the time of collection and printing, was accurate and correct.

5 Contributor Profile Survey participants reported where they had hog operations. The largest states represented by large producers were Iowa (6.7%), Illinois (7.9%), and Missouri (.8%). Small to mid-size producers were similar with Iowa (.56%) leading, but differed from there with Minnesota (.%) and Indiana (.%) having the next most representation. The figures below show the number of full-time employees per contributor group. A large majority of respondents were from small to mid-size producers, however, as mentioned, the large survey respondents represent more employees within the industry overall. Organizations: How many full-time employees are employed by your company? 6.9% 7.9% 7.%.69% 6.9%.% to to 5 5 to 5 5 to to 5 5+ Organizations: How many full-time employees are employed by your company?.7%.6%.7%.% 5.6% 5.6% or less 5 to 9 to 9 to 5 5 to + Participants were asked to provide descriptors of their operation. While almost half of small to mid-size growers were in the independent grower category (.5%) (owns pigs, sold at any life stage), most of the large producers classified their operations as an integrator (68.97%) (owns pigs from birth to finished pork product). Which category best describes your company? Integrator.95% 68.97% Producers Independent Grower 7.%.5% Producers Contract Grower.79% 5.% % % % 6% 8% 5

6 Key Findings While most small to mid-size producers are in the independent grower category (.5%), most of the large producers were categorized as an integrator (68.97%). producers are more likely to provide a bonus plan for their farm employees (86.%), compared to 6.% of small to mid-sized producers. Both large and small producers noted that their most common performance measurement was based on pigs weaned/sow/year. On average for animal caretakers, small to mid-size producers paid a bonus of $,97 versus $,7 by large producers. In contrast, large producers paid more bonus to farm managers, $5,76 versus $5,9 paid by small to mid-size producers. A greater percentage of large producers provided medical insurance to their employees and their employees family members. Small to mid-size producers on average had a less diverse workforce population. producers had 5.% more employees that identified as Hispanic and had.76% more females in their workforce. Turnover rates were lower among animal caretakers with small to mid-size producers, while large producers saw a lower turnover rate for farm manager roles. Both small to mid-size and large producers cited bonuses as the most utilized method to motivate their workforce. Though bonuses were the most common motivator cited, small to mid-size producers also offered flexible hours to motivate staff, while large producers leveraged the use of promotions to motivate employees. Referrals are a heavily relied upon method of recruiting manager level employees, no matter the size of the company. Most large producers looked to internet job boards (79.%), and referrals (68.97%) to fill manager positions, while most small to mid-size producers used word of mouth (6.%), and referrals (8.8%). For animal caretaker positions, word of mouth and referrals dominated as methods of recruitment. Both large and small to mid-size producers noted that production workers and production managers were the most difficult roles to recruit. companies are more likely to utilize part-time animal caretakers, 86.% compared to 6.% for small to mid-size producers. Vital components such as ear and eye protection are common safety mechanisms for both large and small to mid-size producers. producers are more likely to keep records of accidents and injuries, and have written procedures for emergency situations. 6

7 What s Changed? AgCareers.com and the National Pork Board produced a similar survey in. The following are key highlights of what has changed or remained the same for both large and small to mid-size producers since as it relates to compensation and HR practices within the pork industry. The Employee Compensation in Pork Production survey is available at For large producers, in, % of large companies paid less than $.5 per hour for an animal caretaker with no experience. In 6, there was a shift and nearly a quarter (.%) of companies now pay more than $.5 per hour. For small to mid-size producers, a similar shift was seen. In, 89% of respondents paid less than $.5 per hour for an animal caretaker with no experience compared to 7.% that paid less than $.5 per hour in 6. When looking at the large producers, in, 86.96% of respondents paid less than $.5 per hour for an animal caretaker with five or more years of experience. In 6, there was a shift and a larger percentage (8.7%) of companies paid more than $.5 per hour for an animal caretaker with five or more years of experience. Similarly for small to mid-size producers, in, 5.% of respondents paid less than $.5 per hour for an animal caretaker with more than five years of experience. In 6, a larger percentage of respondents (75%) are now paying more than $.5 per hour for the same position. Relatively the same number of large producers from the 6 survey have an incentive program in place as compared to the survey. Around % fewer small to mid-size producers reported having a bonus plan in place than those that responded in. Pigs weaned/sow/year remained the most common performance measurement indicator for both large and small to mid-size producers in both the and 6 surveys. producers noted an % increase in this response in 6 results; similarly, small to mid-size noted a.9% increase. There was a slight increase in the percentage of large producers offering medical, dental, and vision insurance in the 6 survey and a slight decrease in the percentage of companies offering disability and life insurance. The percentage of small to mid-size producers offering medical coverage for employees declined from to 6 by 6.%. Bonuses remained the top motivator used by large producers and small to mid-size producers in both surveys. For large producers they also consistently continued to use promotions and training and development. New in the 6 results, small to mid-size producers are utilizing flexible hours more often to motivate staff. The percentage of large employers using internet job boards increased.9%, the use of referrals decreased 9.9%, and word of mouth decreased roughly 5.9% for recruiting manager level employees. Referrals, word of mouth and help wanted ads continued to dominate as recruiting methods of animal caretakers for both the large and small to mid-size groups. Production workers and production managers were consistently noted as the most difficult roles to recruit for by both the large and small to mid-size producers in both the survey as well as the 6 survey. 7 7

8 8 COMPENSATION

9 Animal Caretaker Wages Participants were asked to provide a baseline benchmark for overall compensation. The starting compensation ranges for animal caretakers with both no experience and with five years of swine experience were reported. Participants from the large producers group most commonly reported a starting wage between $9.5 $.5 (8.8%), while the most common starting wage for small to mid-size producers was slightly higher at $.5-$.5 (8.%). Starting salaries for large producers were more concentrated between $9.5 to $.5 while small to mid-size producers saw a wide range of responses in each category. What is the average starting wage for someone with no swine experience hired as an animal caretaker? $7.5 or less $7.5 - $8.5 $8.5 - $9.5 $9.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $5.5 $5.5+ Not Applicable 6.9%.%.% 7.%.69%.8%.7% 8.7% 7.86% 9.5% 9.5% 5.8%.97%.78%.97%.78% Animal caretakers with five years of experience mostly have a higher hourly wage. Most (7.59%) large producers indicated that they paid $.5 - $.5, the most common response from small to mid-size producers was $5.5+ per hour (8.97%). Again, animal caretakers with five years of experience, in the large producer survey saw more concentrated pay levels, while the small to mid-size producers saw salary levels in all categories. This variation may be due to the size of the operation as well as the absence of a more structured compensation function. What is the average wage for someone employed as an animal caretaker with your company for 5 years? $7.5 or less $7.5 - $8.5 $8.5 - $9.5 $9.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $.5 $.5 - $5.5 $5.5+ Not Applicable.69% 7.59%.79% 7.% 7.%.9%.%.9% 5.56%.76% 5.95% 7.6% 6.7%.7% 8.97% 5.95% 9

10 Salary Offerings by Job Title Participants were asked to select the salary range that best described the average annual salary or wage for typical roles within the organization. operations provided average salary/ wage information for farm positions and production support positions, as well as program support positions, program and facility specialist positions, program and facility manager positions, and senior management. Each of these categories reflects typical levels of management within large operations organizational structures. Small to mid-size operations provided information on just two employee categories, the farm positions and program support positions. Positions were selected based on research of the prevalence of the role within organizations by size. The following tables outline the most prevalent salary range/hourly wage paid to each position within the employee category. Within each employee category, tables are shown by individual role with responses and percentage of response by target audience. In the case that the employee category was only reported by large operations or only by small to mid-size, only their responses are provided within the table.

11 Farm Management Positions The table below is a compilation of the most prevalent salary range for each role within the Farm Management category. More detailed information on each role individually follows. Those listed as N/A were not asked to report on that particular role. Farm Management Positions Position Title Majority Range Small to MId-Size Majority Range Sow Farm Dept./Asst. Manager $, - $5,.8% $5, - $, 8.65% Sow Farm Manager (one farm) $, - $5, 8.8% $, - $5,.% Sow Farm Area Manager (multiple farms) $6, - $7,.8% $5, - $6, 8.% Sow Farm Division Manager $8,+.8% N/A N/A Grower Finisher Area Manager (multiple sites) $5, - $6,.8% $, - $5, 9.5% Grower Finisher Division Manager $6, - $7, / $8,+.% (each) N/A N/A Farm Manager Trainee $5, - $,.% N/A N/A Sow Farm Department or Assistant Manager was more prevalent among large producers and most commonly paid an annual salary of $,-$5, (.8%) or $5, - $, (.%). Most (8.9%) small to mid-size producers reported that they do not have this position, of those that did, $5,- $, was the most common salary range (8.65%). Pay Range Farm Management: Sow Farm Department or Assistant Manager Responses Responses Not Applicable % Less than $,.% $, - $5, 7.78% $5, - $, 6.9% 8 7.% $, - $5,.8%.7% $5, - $, 9.% % $, - $5, 5 7.%.9% $5, - $6, 6 6.5% $6, - $7,.59% $7, - $8, $8,+ Totals 9 5

12 Sow Farm Managers of large producers were reported to make $,-$5, by 8.8% or $5,-$6, by 7.9% of respondents. Most (.95%) small to mid-size producers reported that they did not have this position and of those that did, the most common salary range was $,-$5, (.%). Farm Management: Sow Farm Manager (one farm) Pay Range Responses Responses Not Applicable 78 Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $, 6 $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8,+.% 8.8% 7.9% %.%.59%.8% 5.6% 7.9%.% 6.7% 7.%.98% Totals % Sow Farm Area Manager was noted as not applicable by 67.6% of small to mid-size producers, while.8% of large producers reported paying $6,-$7, annually for the position. Farm Management: Sow Farm Area Manager (multiple sow farms) Pay Range Responses Responses Not Applicable 5 7.% 69 Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, %.8%.79% 67.6% Totals %.9%.79%.9%.59%.76% 8.% 5.56% 5.56%.97%

13 For Sow Farm Division Managers, the most common range was $8,+ (.8%), followed by $7,-$8, (.%). This position was only available for response by large producers. Farm Management: Sow Farm Division Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 6.69% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8,+ 7.79%.%.8% Totals 9 Grower Finisher Area Managers were reported to make $5,-$6, (.8%) from large producers and small to mid-size producers most commonly reported $,-$5, (9.5%). Farm Management: Grower Finisher Area Manager (multiple finishing sites) Pay Range Responses Responses Not Applicable 6.9% 9 Less than $, 7 $, - $5, 9 $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8,+ 6.79%.69%.8%.% %.78%.57% 5.6% 5.95% 7.5% 9.5%.%.76%.59% Totals 9 5.8%

14 Grower Finisher Division Manager was only available for response by large producers. Salary responses were between $6,- $7, (.%), $8,+ (.%) and $7,-$8, (7.%). Farm Management: Grower Finisher Division Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 7.% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, %.% 7.%.% Totals 9 The Farm Manager Trainee position was also only available for response by large producers. Farm Manager Trainees were most likely to make $5,-$, (.%). Farm Management: Farm Manager Trainee Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 9.% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, %.%.%.69% $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8,+ Totals 9

15 Program & Facility Manager Positions Survey respondents from the large producers group were asked to indicate the average salary range of program and facility manager positions. The figures on the following pages display the survey findings of large producers. These roles were not relevant to the small to mid-size group. The table below is a compilation of the most prevalent salary range for each role within the Program & Facility Manager category. More detailed information on each role individually follows. Program & Facility Manager Positions Position Title Majority Range Accounting Controller $8, - $9, Feed Mill Manager Maintenance Manager Construction Manager Logistics Manager Marketing Manager $, - $5, / $6, - $7, / $7, - $8, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, / $7, - $8, $5, - $6, / $7, - $8, $, - $5, / $6, - $7, 7.% 7.% (each).69%.79% (each) 7.% (each) 6.9% (each) Regional Veterinarian $8, - $9,.79% Regional Environmental Manager $6, - $7,.69% 5

16 Accounting Controller: Salary ranges were most commonly reported at $8,-$9, (7.%) and $9,-$, (.79%). Pay Range Not Applicable 6 Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, Program & Facility Manager: Accounting Controller Responses 5.69% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% 7.%.79%.%.% $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 Feed Mill Manager: Salary ranges were clustered from $,-$8, with the majority of the individual ranges within the larger overall spread at 7.% each. Program & Facility Manager: Feed Mill Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 7.% Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, %.% 7.% 7.% $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, 6.9% $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 6

17 Maintenance Manager: Salary ranges were reported across a wide array of pay ranges from $,-$9, with $5,- $6, receiving the highest percentage (.69%). Pay Range Not Applicable 5 Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, Program & Facility Manager: Maintenance Manager Responses % 7.%.69%.79% 6.9% 7.% $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 Construction Manager: The most prevalent salary ranges reported were $6,-$7, and $7,-$8,, both selected by.79% of participants. Program & Facility Manager: Construction Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 5 5.7% Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, 6.9%.79%.79% $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, 6.9% $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 7

18 Logistics Manager: The majority of participants listed salary ranges of $5, - $6, or $7, - $8, (7.% each). Program & Facility Manager: Logistics Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 9.% Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, % 7.% 6.9% 7.% $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, 6.9% $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 Marketing Manager: A large percentage (65.5%) did not report a salary for the Marketing Manager role, possibly indicating that they did not have the position within their company. Other respondents reported a wide salary range from $,-$,. Program & Facility Manager: Marketing Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable % Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, 6.9% 6.9% $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 8

19 Regional Veterinarian: Respondents reported a wide salary range from $5, - $,+..79% reported they paid $8,- $9, and.% reported they paid $9,-$,. Pay Range Not Applicable Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, Program & Facility Manager: Regional Veterinarian Responses 8.8% 6.9%.79%.% $, - $, 6.9% $,+ Totals 9 Regional Environmental Manager: The most popular response for pay was $6,-$7, as reported by.69%. Program & Facility Manager: Regional Environmental Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable.8% Less than $5, $5, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, 6.69% $7, - $8, 6.9% $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $,.% 6.9% $, - $, $,+ Totals 9 9

20 Program & Facility Specialist Positions producers reported the salary ranges for program and facility specialist positions. This employee category was reported by large operations only. The table below is a compilation of the most prevalent salary range for each role within the Program & Facility Specialist category. More detailed information on each role individually follows. Program & Facility Specialist Positions Position Title Majority Range Accounting/Finance $5, - $6, Facilities & Maintenance $5, - $6,.%.% Payroll/Benefits/HR Generalists Safety Recruiting/Training Purchasing $5, - $6, $, - $5, $, - $5, $, - $5, 7.59%.%.%.% Communications Manager $, - $5,.% Truck Wash Manager $, - $5,.8% The most common salary range for the following three roles, Accounting/Finance, Facilities and Maintenance, and Payroll/ Benefits/HR Generalist, was reported at $5, - $6,. Program & Facility Specialist: Accounting/Finance Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 6 Less than $, $, - $, 5 $, - $5, 6 $5, - $6, 7 $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals 9.69% 7.%.69%.% 6.9% 6.9%

21 Pay Range Program & Facility Specialist: Facilities & Maintenance Responses Not Applicable 8 Less than $, $, - $, 7 $, - $5, $5, - $6, 9 $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals %.%.79%.% Program & Facility Specialist: Payroll/Benefits/HR Generalist Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 7 Less than $, $, - $, 6 $, - $5, 7 $5, - $6, 8 $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals 9.%.69%.% 7.59%

22 The most common salary range for Safety, Recruiting/Training, Purchasing, Communications Manager, and Truck Wash Manager, was reported as $,-$5,. Program & Facility Specialist: Safety Pay Range Responses Not Applicable Less than $, $, - $, $, - $5, 7 $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals 9 7.9%.%.79%.% 6.9% Program & Facility Specialist: Recruiting/Training Pay Range Responses Not Applicable Less than $, $, - $, $, - $5, 9 $5, - $6, 5 $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals 9.8% 6.9%.% 7.%

23 Program & Facility Specialist: Purchasing Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 9 Less than $, $, - $, $, - $5, 9 $5, - $6, 5 $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals 9.%.79%.% 7.% 6.9% Program & Facility Specialist: Communications Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable Less than $, $, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals %.% 6.9% 6.9% Program & Facility Specialist: Truck Wash Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable Less than $, $, - $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9,+ Totals 9 7.9% 6.9% 6.9%.8%.%

24 Program Support Positions Both large and small to mid-size producers were asked to report pay ranges for program support positions. While large producers were likely to pay more for each of the program support positions, small to mid-size producers seemed to pay a wider range of salaries for those roles they reported on. The table below is a compilation of the most prevalent salary range for each role within the Program Support category. More detailed information on each role individually follows. Those listed as N/A were not asked to report on that particular role. Program Support Positions Position Title Majority Range Majority Range Environmental Technician $. - $6. 7.% N/A N/A Truck Driver $6. - $8..% $. - $6. 5.8% Mechanic $6. - $8. / $. - $..69% (each) $. - $6..% Truck Wash $. - $ % N/A N/A Feed Mill Technician $. - $. 7.59% N/A N/A Maintenance $. - $6..8% $. - $ % Administrative Support $. - $. / $. - $ % (each) $. - $..9% Office Manager N/A N/A $. - $6..%

25 Environmental Technician: This role was reported by large producers only. Many respondents (6.7%) indicated that an Environmental Technician was not applicable to their company. For those who do have the role, most (7.%) indicated they paid between $.-$6.. Program Support: Environmental Technician Pay Range per Hour Responses Not Applicable 8 $8. or less $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. $. - $6. 5 $6. - $8. $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. $. - $6. $6. - $8. $8.+ Totals 9 6.7% 6.9% 6.9% 7.% 5

26 Truck Driver: Average hourly wage ranges for large producers were reported to be between $.-$6. (7.59%) and $6.- $8. (.%). Average wages for small to mid-size producers were reported to be between $.-$6. (5.8%). Program Support: Truck Driver Pay Range per Hour Responses Responses Not Applicable.79% $8. or less $8. - $. $. - $. 7 $. - $. $. - $6. $6. - $8. $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. $. - $ % $8.+ Totals %.% 6.9% 6.9% %.%.9%.78% 9.9% 5.8% $6. - $8. 9.% 7.%.78%.59%.98% Mechanic: Average hourly wage ranges for mechanic positions with large producers were reported as $6. - $8. (.69%) or $. - $. (.69%). Small to mid-size producers more commonly paid $. - $6. (.%) or $8. - $. (8.7%). Program Support: Mechanic Pay Range per Hour Responses Responses Not Applicable 7.% $8. or less $8. - $. 5 $. - $. 5 $. - $..79% 5 $. - $6..% 6 $6. - $ % 9 $8. - $. 6.9% $. - $. $. - $. $. - $ % $8.+.79% Totals %.79%.98%.98% 5.95%.% $6. - $8..79% 7.5% 8.7%.7%.%.59% 6

27 Truck Wash: This role was reported on by large producers only. Over half of the companies responded that an hourly rate of $. -$. (.%) or $.-$6. (7.59%) was paid. Program Support: Truck Wash Pay Range per Hour Responses Not Applicable 9 $8. or less $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. 7 $. - $6. 8 $6. - $8. $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. $. - $6. $6. - $8. $8.+ Totals 9.%.79%.% 7.59% Feed Mill Technician: This role was also only reported on by large producers. Most (7.59%) companies responded that they paid $.-$. per hour. Program Support: Feed Mill Technician Pay Range per Hour Responses Not Applicable $8. or less $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. 8 $. - $6. $6. - $8. $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. $. - $6. $6. - $8. $8.+ Totals 9.8% 6.9% 6.9% 7.59%.79% 6.9% 7

28 Maintenance: Most (.8%) large companies surveyed pay $.-$6., and most (6.67%) small to mid-size producers also noted $.-$6.. Program Support: Maintenance Pay Range per Hour Responses Responses Not Applicable 6.9% 9 $8. or less 5 $8. - $. $. - $..% $. - $. 5 7.% $. - $6..8% $6. - $8..79% $8. - $. $. - $. $. - $. $. - $6..% $8.+.% Totals %.98%.9% 5.6%.% 6.67%.9% $6. - $8..% 5.56%.57%.79%.79% Administrative Support: This role most commonly reported to pay $.-$. and $.- $6. by both large producers and small to mid-size producers. Program Support: Administrative Support Pay Range per Hour Responses Responses Not Applicable 6.9% 7 $8. or less 5 $8. - $. $. - $. 6.9% 9 $. - $ % $. - $ % $6. - $ % 8 $8. - $..% 7 $. - $. $. - $. $. - $6. $8.+.% Totals %.98%.9% 7.5%.9%.9% 7.% $6. - $8..% 6.75%.79%.79%.9% 8

29 Office Manager: This role was reported on by only the small to mid-size producers. Average wages were reported to mostly be $. - $6. (.%) per hour. Program Support: Office Manager Pay Range per Hour Responses Not Applicable 7 $8. or less $8. - $. 5 $. - $. $. - $. 7 $. - $6. $6. - $8. 9 $8. - $. $. - $. 5 $. - $. $. - $6. $6. - $8. $8.+ Totals 7 5.6%.59%.98% 5.56% 6.75%.% 7.5% 8.7% 5.95%.59%.59%.9%.78% Senior Management Positions Senior management roles were only reported on by large producers. Due to the differing size of the participants within the large producer survey, there was generally a wide array of responses for salary ranges of senior management positions. In addition, nearly half of participants did not include salary data for each of the roles, with the exception of Human Resource Manager. The table below is a compilation of the most prevalent salary range for each role within the Senior Management category. More detailed information on each role individually follows. Senior Management Positions Position Title Majority Range Chief Operations Officer $5,+ Chief Financial Officer $5,+ 7.59% 7.59% Human Resources Manager Veterinarian Nutritionist Environmental Manager Facilities & Maintenance Manager $, - $, $8, - $9, $7, - $8, $6, - $7, $6, - $7,.79% 7.%.79%.79%.79% 9

30 Chief Operations Officer: Eight respondents (7.59%) indicated a salary between the broader range of $,-$5, and eight (7.59%) participants also noted a salary of $5,+. Senior Management: Chief Operations Officer Pay Range Responses Not Applicable Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $5, $5, % Totals 9 7.9% Chief Financial Officer: Six respondents (.69%) indicated a salary between the broader range of $,-$5,. Eight participants (7.59%) noted a salary of $5,+. Senior Management: Chief Financial Officer 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% Pay Range Responses Not Applicable.8% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, 6.9% $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, 6.9% $, - $, $, - $5, 6.9% $5, % Totals 9

31 Human Resource Manager: A wide array of salary responses were received. Respondents reported a range of $,-$5,+. The range that received the largest concentration was a salary of $,-$, (.79%). Senior Management: Human Resource Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 8 Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $5, $5,+ Totals % 6.9%.% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9%.79% Veterinarian: Five respondents (7.%) indicated a salary between $8,-$9,, eight participants (7.59%) noted a salary between the broader range of $,-$,. Pay Range Not Applicable Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, Senior Management: Veterinarian Responses $, - $5, $5,+ Totals % 8.8% 7.%.%.% 6.9%

32 Nutritionist:.69% of participants noted that their nutritionist roles had a salary range of $7, - $9,. Senior Management: Nutritionist Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 5 5.7% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8,.79% $8, - $9, 6.9% $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, $, - $5, $5,+ 6.9% Totals 9 Environmental Manager: While the salary responses ranged from $6, - $,, the greatest concentration of responses (.79%) was $6, - $7,. Senior Management: Environmental Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 5 5.7% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, $6, - $7, $7, - $8, $8, - $9,.79% 6.9% 6.9% $9, - $, $, - $, $, - $, 6.9% 6.9% $, - $, $, - $, $, - $5, $5,+ Totals 9

33 Facilities and Maintenance Manager: Salary levels were most concentrated at $6, - $7, (.79%) or $9, - $, (.%). Senior Management: Facilities & Maintenance Manager Pay Range Responses Not Applicable 8.8% Less than $, $, - $5, $5, - $6, 6.9% $6, - $7,.79% $7, - $8, $8, - $9, $9, - $,.% $, - $, $, - $, $, - $, 6.9% $, - $, $, - $5, $5,+ Totals 9 Bonus/Incentive Plans In addition to salary, most organizations offered a bonus or incentive plan to farm employees. While the large majority of large producers (86.%) provided an incentive plan for farm employees, a little under half of small to mid-size producers (6.%) offered an incentive plan to farm employees. The figure below outlines the breakdown of bonus (incentive) plans offered for each group. Does your organization have a bonus plan for farm employees? Yes 6.% 86.% No.79% 5.97% % % % 6% 8% % Producers Producers

34 Survey participants also shared average annual bonuses awarded to animal caretakers and farm managers. Survey results indicated that animal caretakers of small to mid-size producers on average received a higher incentive payout than those of large producers, while large producers offered a higher incentive payout for farm manager employees. Average Bonus Awarded Animal Caretaker $,7.7 $,97.6 Farm Manager $5,9.98 $5,76.56 $ $, $, $, $, $5, $6, Producers Producers Of those producers that provided an incentive plan, both large and small to mid-size producers noted that their most common performance measurement was based on pigs weaned/sow/year. On what performance measure is the bonus (incentive) plan based? Measure Responses Responses Pigs farrowed / sow / year 8.% 8 6.9% Pigs weaned / sow / year 9 76.% 7 6.% Pigs / space / year 8.% Conception rate.% % Farrowing rate 9 6.% 6.79% Feed efficiency 5.% Pounds of pork produced / year 6.%.% Mortality rate (death loss) Financial benchmarks Other Question Respondents %.% 8.% 6 9.8% 8.5%.79% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents.

35 BENEFITS 5

36 Paid Holidays Though the large majority of small to mid-size producers noted they do not offer paid holidays, of those that do, five or less holidays was the most common response at 5%. producers gave slightly more as the majority noted they give either six or seven paid holidays,.% each. How many paid holidays do you give employees per year? None 5 or less N/A.79%.%.%.%.%.56% 5.%.% 5.87%.57%.98%.59% Paid Time Off Plan producers were most likely to adopt a paid time off program (6.7%), as compared to small to mid-size producers (6.9%). Which of the following best describes your company s time off policy? Traditional paid vacation/sick program.8% 9.% Producers Paid time off or PTO program 6.9% 6.7% Producers Do not offer either 6.67% Other 7.9% % % % 6% 8% 6

37 Vacation Offered - Those with Traditional Vacation/Sick Plan Of those that offer a traditional vacation/sick plan, most respondents in both the large and small to mid-size groups indicated they offer ten to fourteen vacation days per year to employees. Employees with 5 years employment with your company: how many vacation days do you offer? to days Producers to 6 days 7.6% Producers 7 to 9 days.58% to days 5.% 7 5 to 8 days.8% 8+ days 5.65% % % % 6% 8% 7

38 Sick Days Offered - Those with Traditional Vacation/Sick Plan The number of sick days given to employees in traditional vacation/sick offerings varied slightly from large to small to mid-size producers. While small to mid-size producers generally gave one to three sick days per year, the large producers were split, as they gave one to three or four to six days per year. Employees with 5 years employment with your company: how many sick days do you offer? to days.% 5 Producers to 6 days 9.% 5 Producers 7 to 9 days.5% to days.8% 5 to 8 days.8% 8+ days % % % 6% 8% 8

39 Paid Time Off (PTO) Offered - Those with a PTO Plan For employers that offer time off as PTO or Paid Time Off, small to mid-size producers provided to 5 days, while large producers most commonly responded they provide 6 to days of PTO per year. Employees with 5 years employment with your company: how many PTO days do you offer? to 5 days 7.58% Producers 6 to days.% 5.5% Producers to 5 days 7.78% 56.6% 6 to days 8.8%.% to 5 days.% 6.67% 5+ days % % % 6% 8% 9

40 Benefits by Employee Category In addition to average salary ranges by employee category, both participating audiences were asked to provide benefits data for their employees. Listed below are responses by producer size and role type. Animal Caretaker Benefit Responses Responses Retirement Plan 5 86.% 5 Training & Development % 5 Bonus / Profit-Sharing Plan 68.97% 99 Unemployment Benefits 8.76% Continuing Education.8% 76 Vehicle / Gas / Allowance 7.% 5 Mobile Phone 9 Fresh or Processed Pork Housing / Allowance Utilities / Allowance 6.8%.69%.% % 59.9% 9.9% 5.98%.6%.6% 5.8% 55.56%.% 8.65% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. Farm Manager Benefit Responses Responses Retirement Plan 5 86.% Training & Development 7 9.% Bonus / Profit-Sharing Plan 79.% Unemployment Benefits 8.76% 6 Continuing Education 7.% 8 Vehicle / Gas / Allowance.8% 89 Mobile Phone 8 6.7% 6 Fresh or Processed Pork Housing / Allowance Utilities / Allowance.8%.8%.% % 5.78%.87% 6.%.9% 5.%.6% 5.78% 6.9%.% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents.

41 Mid-Level Management Benefit Responses Responses Retirement Plan % 99 Training & Development % Bonus / Profit-Sharing Plan 75.86% 7 Unemployment Benefits 8.76% Continuing Education 7.% 6 Vehicle / Gas / Allowance % 58 Mobile Phone 79.% 75 Fresh or Processed Pork Housing / Allowance Utilities / Allowance.8% 6.9% 6 9.9%.7% 8.7% 9.68% 5.%.% 9.76%.6%.7%.9% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. Production Support Benefit Responses Responses Retirement Plan % 9 Training & Development 5 86.% 99 Bonus / Profit-Sharing Plan 8 6.7% 6 Unemployment Benefits 8.76% 97 Continuing Education 5 5.7% 56 Vehicle / Gas / Allowance.8% 6 Mobile Phone.8% 6 Fresh or Processed Pork Housing / Allowance Utilities / Allowance 7.9%.% 9 6.9% 9.9%.8% 8.9%.%.% 5.% 7.% 9.% 8.7% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents.

42 Employee Insurance Coverage Respondents provided specific information on insurance benefits and coverage for employees. This is another area where major differences were noted between the two target audiences. In terms of insurance benefits, large operations are more readily providing coverage for employees. Employee Insurance Coverage Medical Coverage 5.59% Dental Coverage Vision/Eye Care Coverage Disability Insurance Life Insurance Question Respondents 8.76% 75.86% 7.% 8.76% 9.%.9%.% 6.9% 5 Of those offering insurance options, participants were also asked to provide the average percent the employee pays for varying insurance offerings. The table below depicts the breakout by large and small to mid-size producers. It should be noted that for disability insurance, more than two thirds (66.67%) of large producers covered % of the premium and more than one third (9.6%) of small to mid-size producers covered % of the premium. For life insurance, approximately 75% of large producer respondents covered % of the premium. More than half (5.5%) of small to mid-size respondents covered % of the premium. The premium contributions listed below are for those where the premium was not covered %. What percentage of the premium does the employee pay for employee only coverage? Paid Paid Medical Coverage.8%.8% Dental Coverage Vision/Eye Care Coverage Disability Insurance Life Insurance 59.7% 66.% 6.9% 6.5%.% 6.67% 6.66%.8%

43 Employee Family Members Insurance Coverage Similarly, respondents were asked to provide what types of insurance or coverage were provided to employees families. Again, this was an area of difference between the two audiences. The table below outlines the percentage of respondents in the large and small to mid-size segments. Employee Family Insurance Coverage Medical Coverage 5.% Dental Coverage Vision/Eye Care Coverage 8.76% 75.86% 7.86%.7% Question Respondents 9 5 Respondents extending these benefits to employees families were also asked to provide the percentage contribution the employee pays for family coverage. What percentage of the premium does the employee family member pay for coverage? Paid Paid Medical Coverage 8.7% 5.% Dental Coverage Vision/Eye Care Coverage 66.7% 7.9% 5.78% 55.%

44 HR MANAGEMENT

45 Average Number of Hours Worked per Week Participants were asked to share the average number of hours worked by animal caretakers. The majority of respondents in each audience fell into an average range of to 5 hours each week. This was according to 6.% of small to mid-size producers and 5.7% of large producers. What is the average number of hours total an animal caretaker is expected to work each week? 9% 8% 7% 6% 5.7% 5% 6.% %.% % % % % 5.56%.79% 6.9%.% 5.%.% 9.%.8% or less Producers Producers Weekend Work Schedule In addition, participants were then asked to respond to how they scheduled weekend work for employees. A majority of both large and small to mid-size producers stated employees work two weekends per month, which implies they have roughly two weekends off per month as well. How many weekends total do animal caretakers have off each month? 9% 89.66% 8% 7% 6% 5% 5.79% % % % % % 9.% 7.6%.%.8%.8%.68%.57% None Flexible; No set schedule N/A Producers Producers 5

46 Participants were asked to provide insight into how employees that worked weekends and holidays were compensated for this service. Respondents within each audience approached pay and weekend work hours for animal caretakers differently. When full-time animal caretakers work weekends or holidays, does your company: Response Responses Responses Structure work hours during the week to limit hours to 7.68% Allow employees to take comp time % 8 9.5% Pay overtime 7.9% 7 9.7% Do not pay overtime.8% 76.6% Not applicable 6.9% 5.% Totals 89 *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. Participants that paid overtime were also asked if they were required to do so by law. You indicated that you pay overtime. Is this required by state law? Yes 5.5%.% No 5.55% 56.76% % % % 6% 8% % Producers Producers Diversity Overall, large producers reported a higher percentage of workers that identified as Hispanic (6.%). Small to mid-size producers noted that.7% of their workforce identified as Hispanic. r producers also had a larger female workforce (9.%) as compared to 7.55% reported by the small to mid-size respondents. 6

47 Turnover Rate Turnover rates were significantly lower at.% among animal caretakers within small to mid-size producers than the turnover rate for animal caretakers within large producers (5.%). The turnover rate for farm managers was similar for both audiences. Turnover rates were calculated as an average of reported turnover rates. Turnover Rate by Role Animal Caretaker.% 5.% Producers Farm Manager 9.% 9.6% Producers % % % 6% Performance Appraisals 8.76% of large producers noted they conduct performance appraisals on an annual basis and 5.9% of small to mid-size producers noted the same. If performance appraisals are used, how often are they conducted? Quarterly Semi-Annually 6.9% 9.9% 6.9% 8.7% Producers Producers Annually 5.9% 8.76% Never 6.59% Other.57% % % % 6% 8% % 7

48 Motivation Tactics One of the biggest challenges for an employer of any size is keeping their employees motivated. Participants were asked how they motivated employees to keep them productive and challenged by their roles. Organizations of both audiences used a variety of strategies. Though bonuses were the most commonly reported motivator amongst both groups, small to mid-size producers also offered flexible hours to motivate staff, while large producers leveraged the use of promotions to motivate employees. How do you motivate employees to keep them productive and challenged by their role? Succession Planning.%.8% Bonus 5.76% 8.76% Remuneration.79%.9% Promotion 9.% 79.% Flexible Hours 7.% 5.8% Recognition Programs 6.7% 6.7% Training & Development 79.%.5% Other 5.95% % % % 6% 8% % Producers Producers *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. 8

49 RECRUITMENT 9

50 Recruiting Methods - Manager To benchmark successful recruitment practices, participants were asked to provide the most frequently utilized options for recruiting managers. Most large producers looked to internet job boards (79.%), and referrals (68.97%) to fill manager positions, while most small to mid-size producers turned to word of mouth (6.%), and referrals (8.8%). Please select the most frequently utilized options for recruiting a manager. College / University placement services 55.7%.9% Vocational / Technical school placement.% 7.9% Professional placement services College / University career days.8% 5.7%.76% 6.75% Vocational / Technical career days 7.59% 6.5% High school recruitment.79% 8.7% Help wanted ads (magazine and newspaper).8%.8% Help wanted ads.%.% Word of mouth 58.6% 6.% Family.% 7.7% Referrals 68.97% 8.8% Military veterans 7.%.8% Internet job boards (e.g. AgCareers.com) 79.% 5.8% International talent.%.59% Social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn).8% 5.8% Other 6.9% 8.% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. 5

51 Recruiting Methods - Animal Caretaker Similarly, participants were asked about recruitment tactics for animal caretakers. Word of mouth and referrals were noted as top methods for recruiting an animal caretaker among both large and small to mid-size producers. Please select the most frequently utilized options for recruiting an animal caretaker. College / University placement services 7.% 5.6% Vocational / Technical school placement.79% 5.95% Professional placement services College / University career days.%.%.8% 5.56% Vocational / Technical career days.8% 5.6% High school recruitment 8.8% 5.8% Help wanted ads (magazine and newspaper) 79.% 5.% Help wanted ads 68.97%.7% Word of mouth 86.% 7.% Family 55.7%.7% Referrals 9.% 5.98% Military veterans.79%.98% Internet job boards (e.g. AgCareers.com) 58.6% 9.9% International talent.%.59% Social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn) 55.7% 5.87% Other.78% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. 5

52 Difficult-to-Fill Positions Inevitably, there are positions that can be difficult to fill. Participants were asked to provide a list of those positions most challenging to fill including various production and support roles. Both large and small to mid-size producers reported that production workers and production managers were the most difficult roles to recruit for. In addition,.75% of small to mid-size producers reported that no role was too difficult to recruit. What roles do you find difficult to recruit for? Production Workers 5.8% 79.% Production Managers.8% 58.6% None 6.9%.75% % % % 6% 8% % Producers Producers *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. 5

53 International Recruitment The clear majority of small to mid-size producers noted they are not recruiting internationally (9.7%) and over half of large producers noted the same (58.6%). Of those that are, large producers varied in the types of visas utilized while small to mid-size producers utilized the Permanent Resident (Green Card) most predominantly. If recruiting internationally, which types of visas are you using for initial entry? % 9% 9.7% 8% 7% 6% 58.6% 5% % % % % %.69%.9%.69%.79%.79%.9%.%.8%.79% 5.95% J HB H-A TN Permanent Resident (Green Card) Not Recruiting Internationally Producers Producers *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. 5

54 5 PART-TIME STAFF

55 Many pork production operations employ part-time staff. Survey participants were asked to share how many part-time staff they currently employ. Small to mid-size producers were more likely to have no part-time employees (8.89%), and nearly 5% had less than five. producers were split on the number of part-time employees employed likely due to the size and nature of each operation. How many part-time animal caretakers does your organization employ? None.79% 8.89% Less than 5.% 9.6% 5 to 8.% 7.% to.59%.79% to +.79%.79%.69% % % % 6% 8% % Producers Producers 55

56 Respondents that employed part-time animal caretakers were asked the average number of hours worked. producers noted to 5 hours (6%). Responses were slightly lower at 5 to hours (6.6%) for small to mid-size participants. What is the average number of hours a part-time animal caretaker employee works each week in your company/operation? hours or less 8.% 7.7% -5 hours.% 6.88% 5- hours 6.6%.% -5 hours 6.88% 6.% 5-9 hours 8.%.% Not Applicable.% % % % 6% 8% % Producers Producers 56

57 For producers that employ part-time animal caretakers, the most common pay range for both small to mid-size and large producers was $.-$.. Which of the following is closest to the hourly wage paid to part-time animal caretaker employees? Less than $6..% $6. - $7. $7. - $8. $8. - $9. 8.%.65%.99% $9. - $. 6.% 8.8% $. - $..%.7% $. - $. 7.5% $. - $..%.9% $. - $. 5.8% $. - $5. 7.% $5.+.5% Totals 57

58 58 WORKER SAFETY

59 Participants were asked to share which safety practices they currently utilize within their operations. Vital components such as ear and eye protection are common safety mechanisms for both large and small to mid-size producers. Please indicate which of the following are used in your operation to improve worker safety. Written worker safety program 88.89% 6.% Written emergency action plan for fire and extreme weather 9.59% 58.56% Safety policy manual Records of accidents and injuries 8.8% 96.%.99% 5.5% Records of days away from work, transfer to light duty, or transfers due to injuries 77.78%.88% Regular safety program audits 59.6% 5.68% Regular facilities safety audits 7.7%.8% Regular workplace safety training 88.89%.% Dust mask 85.9% 9.99% Ear protection 9.59% 9.9% Eye protection 9.59% 7.6% Protective footwear 7.7% 6.86% *s do not total %; respondents were allowed to select more than one response. Responses are calculated by dividing the number of responses by respondents. 59

60 For more information, please contact the National Pork Board at or visit Contributing Partner: AgCareers.com is the leading online job board and human resource services provider for agriculture and food. Providing global talent solutions in agriculture and food remains our mission. Additional human resource products and services include an agribusiness salary survey, the Compensation Benchmark Review. 7 Pork Board, Des Moines, IA, USA. This message funded by America s Pork Producers and the Pork Checkoff.