Proposals for the Adjustment of the Salaries of Locally …€¦ · · 2014-07-02minimum of the new salary structure after the application of the performance based increase. Except

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK ADB/BD/WP/2010/137/Rev.2

5 November 2010

Prepared by: CHRM

Original: French

Translated by: CLSD

Reviewed by: CHRM

Probable Date of Presentation to the Committee

on Administrative and Human Resources Policy

Issues (CAHR):

8 November 2010

FOR CONSIDERATION

MEMORANDUM

TO: THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

FROM: Cecilia AKINTOMIDE

Secretary General

SUBJECT: PROPOSALS FOR ADJUSTMENT OF SALARIES OF LOCALLY-

RECRUITED STAFF (EFFECTIVE 1 JANUARY 2011)

REVISED VERSION*

Please find attached a revised version of the above-mentioned document, which

takes into account recommendations made by Board members at the Informal

Board meeting held on 26 October 2010.

Attach:

Cc.: The President

SCCD: W. A. A.

*Questions on this document should be referred to:

Mr. Kordje BEDOUMRA Vice President CSVP Ext 2052

Mrs. G. ARCHER-DAVIES Director CHRM Ext. 2031

Ms. J. WAMEYO Division Manager CHRM.2 Ext. 2166

Mr. M. SAIDIL MOCTAR Principal Compensation Officer CHRM.2 Ext. 3320

The revisions take into account the following additional changes which are

tracked in red in the document:

STAFF AT POST IN ABIDJAN

The salary adjustments for GS staff at post in Abidjan will be based on the results of the

Abidjan market. In accordance with the recommendations of the consulting firm, Management

proposes a weighted average salary increase of 5.1%. However the current salary structure is

maintained for 2011.

STAFF AT POST IN TUNIS

In application of the dispositions contained in the Policy Framework governing the Status of

Staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Extended Mission Regime

(ADB/BD/WP/2003/77) approved on 18 July 2003 and the Compensation Framework

(ADB/BD/WP/123/REV4) approved on 15 July 2008, Management recommends (a) the

maintaining of the current salary structure and (b) a weighted average salary increase of 3%.

BUDGETARY IMPACT

The budget impact has been further reduced from 797,926 UA to 624,536 UA.

TABLES MODIFIED

Tables (i), (ii) (iii), 5.3, 6.2.1 and 7.2 have been updated.

PARAGRAPHS MODIFIED

The EXECUTIVE SUMMARY and Chapter 7 - MEASURES ENVISAGED AND

MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS have been updated.

ANNEXE 1

The salary scale for HQ based support staff has been modified.

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

PROPOSALS FOR ADJUSTMENT OF SALARIES OF LOCALLY-RECRUITED

STAFF (EFFECTIVE 1 JANUARY 2011)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

INTRODUCTION 7

SALARY REVIEW CONTEXT 9

COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK OBJECTIVES 11

LOCAL STAFF SERVICE CONDITIONS 13

CONSULTING FIRM’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14

MANAGEMENT’S ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 18

MEASURES ENVISAGED AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 22

Annex 1 : Locally-Recruited Staff Salary Structures for 2011

Annex 2 : Lists of Comparators

Addendum : Consulting Firm’s Report on the Salary Survey

Page | 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The Bank’s compensation policy for locally recruited staff underscores the need to

preserve its external competitiveness on the local market, while ensuring that the performance

of each staff member is fully recognized. The new Compensation Framework

(ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/Rev.4), adopted by the Board of Directors on 15 July 2008 is in

keeping with these goals and aims to encourage employee productivity and better position the

Bank to attract, motivate and retain the best talent by ensuring increased focus on results,

equity, efficiency, competitiveness and long-term sustainability. The Board approved this

compensation framework with two complementary pillars, namely (a) Strengthening of

performance-based remuneration supported by an enhanced market position and (b)

Rationalization of benefits and improving long-term sustainability. For the 2008-2012 period, the

Board of Directors approved a positioning at the 75th percentile as the target market

positioning for all locally-recruited staff.

2. 2010 was the first year of performance-based individual salary adjustments for locally

recruited Field Office staff. On 15 April 2010, the Committee on Administrative Affairs and

Human Resource Policy Issues of the Board (CAHR) endorsed Management’s proposal on the

classification of positions for locally-recruited Field Office staff.

3. For the 2011 salary adjustment exercise, Management has:

Recruited an international firm which has conducted a salary survey of comparators in

all locations where the Bank employs local contract staff;

Set up a committee comprising professional category staff from the Bank’s

organizational units to analyze and improve on management’s recommendations. The

Staff Council has also been consulted on the report.

Had a discussion at the CAHR committee level and Informal Board on its proposals.

4. For Headquarters (HQ) locally recruited staff, the survey shows that the Bank’s salary

structure and weighted average actual salaries lag the reference market average by 5.1% and

16.3% respectively. The consultant recommended an average actual salary increase of 5.1%

which was lower than the actual gap in light of the significant numbers of newly hired staff in

recent years. In so doing the consultant removed the gap that was due to staff turnover.

5. Management divided the Headquarters (HQ) locally recruited staff into two categories

i.e. (a) staff based in Abidjan (b) Staff based in Tunis.

LOCATION TOTAL POSITION Vs ABIDJAN POSITION Vs TUNIS

SCALE SALARY SCALE SALARY

ABIDJAN 36 5.1% 14.96% n/a n/a

TUNIS 390 5.1% 16.43% -49.50 -39.91

TOTAL 426 5.1% 16.30 -49.50 -39.60

Out of the 390 total GS staff based in Tunis, 178 staff were relocated from Abidjan to Tunis

and 212 staff have been recruited in Tunis.

6. In view of the underlying legal and policy framework, the use of Abidjan as reference

for the GS staff salary adjustment was and continues to remain valid. To change this

methodology would amount to introducing a new regime of expatriate status for the GS staff

Page | 2

which may be financially more expensive for the Bank1. For the staff in Tunis, considering,

the Bank’s length of stay in Tunis and the change in staff demographics whereby all the new

staff have been recruited in Tunis since the relocation, management proposes a 3.0% weighted

average increase in actual salaries which is more or less equivalent to the estimated rate of

inflation in Tunisia2.

7. For the 36 staff based in Abidjan, Management proposed to maintain the current salary

structure and to offer a weighted average salary increase of 5.1% as recommended by the

consultant.

8. Based on the fact that the Bank is no longer recruiting new staff in Abidjan and that the

current salary grid remains competitive vis-à-vis the Tunis market, Management proposes to

maintain the salary scale at the 2010 levels.

9. For Field Office (FO) locally recruited staff, the survey shows that the salary structure

is below the reference market target in 22 countries and higher in 3 countries. The survey

also highlighted the differences between the Bank’s weighted average actual salaries and the

targeted 75th percentile of the reference market, from -20.9% to 29.9%., according to

category and local market. A salary structure for Zimbabwe Field Office has also been

developed subsequent to the opening of the Field Office.

10. In light of these analyses, and in order to position Bank salaries at the targeted 75th

percentile of the reference market, the Consulting Firm made recommendations for adjustments to

locally recruited staff salary structures ranging from 0% à 10.8%. With regard to actual salaries,

the Consulting Firm recommended weighted average increases ranging from 0% to 29.9%,

according to category and local reference market positioning.

11. Based on the provisions of the Compensation Framework

(ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/Rev4), Management proposes the following recommendations:

Adjustment or the maintaining of the current salary structure of HQ and FO locally

recruited staff to the 75th percentile of the reference market as indicated in Table (ii) in

order to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

Weighted average increases in the actual salaries of locally recruited staff, as indicated

in Table (iii), to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference

market;

Approval of an amount of Six Hundred and Twenty Four Thousand, Five Hundred and

Thirty Six Units of Account (UA 624,536 ) as indicated in table (i) and its inclusion in

the 2011 Budget to support the proposed adjustments and their impact on the total

payroll (salaries, pensions, dependency allowances and medical contributions), in order

to achieve the 75th

market percentile target as approved by the Board of Directors; and

Adoption of the salary scales in Annex 1, effective 1 January 2011.

1 Legal Note issued by the General Counsel ( Ref ADB/BD/WP/2003/77/Add 1) and

ADB/BD/WP/2010/137/Rev.1/Add.2 2 Source. ESTA March 2010.

Page | 3

12. Management invites the Board of Directors to note that:-

the proposed increases will be applied on the basis of the 2010 performance evaluation

results and the positioning of each staff member concerned on the salary scale and, in the

case of staff recruited in 2010, in proportion to the period of employment at the Bank. The

proposed measures -will be effective 1 January 2011.

a review for the total compensation framework will also be launched for locally

recruited staff.

Page | 4

Table (i): Proposed Salary Adjustments – Budget Implications

BUDGET IMPACT (UA)

LOCATION

STRUCTURE ACTUAL

SALARIES TOTAL

Algeria 0 1,999 1,999

Angola 0 0 0

Burkina Faso 0 21,510 21,510

Cameroon 0 17,999 17,999

Chad 0 907 907

DR Congo 0 38,111 38,111

Cote d'Ivoire 0 24,233 24,233

Tunisia 0 207,875 207,875

Egypt 0 0 0

Ethiopia 0 12,873 12,873

Gabon 0 7,959 7,959

Ghana 0 44,665 44,665

Kenya 0 5,267 5,267

Madagascar 0 0 0

Malawi 0 7,275 7,275

Mali 0 0 0

Morocco 0 3,724 3,724

Mozambique 0 0 0

Nigeria 2,913 0 2,913

Rwanda 0 0 0

Senegal 0 23,829 23,829

Sierra Leone 0 1,257 1,257

Sudan 0 0 0

South Africa 0 38,266 38,266

Tanzania 0 0 0

Uganda 0 0 0

Zambia 0 27,257 27,257

TOTAL 487,919

Pensions, Dependency Allowances and Medical Contributions 136,617

GRAND TOTAL 624,536

Staff members only receive structural salary adjustments if their salaries fall below the

minimum of the new salary structure after the application of the performance based increase.

Except for Nigeria, the increase in the salary structure will not lead to a separate budget

impact because either (a) the weighted average proposed increase to salaries is equal to or

higher than the minimum of the new scale or (b) the staff salaries are already higher than the

new minimum.

Page | 5

Table (ii): Proposed Structural Adjustments – Comparison between Consultant proposals and

Management proposals.

LOCATION

CONSULTANT

FINDINGS VIS-À-

VIS THE

WEIGHTED

AVERAGE 75th

PERCENTILE

CONSULTANT

PROPOSAL

MANAGEMNT

RECOMMENDATIONS

Algeria 3.4 3.4 3.4

Angola 4.3 4.3 4.3

Burkina Faso 9.1 9.1 9.1

Cameroon 4.5 4.5 4.5

Chad 1.9 1.9 1.9

DR Congo 8.4 8.4 8.4

Cote d'Ivoire 5.1 5.1 0

Tunisia -49.5 none 0

Egypt 5.9 5.9 5.9

Ethiopia 5.2 5.2 5.2

Gabon 2.8 2.8 2.8

Ghana 8.4 8.4 8.4

Kenya 10.8 10.8 10.8

Madagascar 7.9 7.9 7.9

Malawi 5.2 5.2 5.2

Mali -1.3 0 0

Morocco -1.6 0 0

Mozambique 3.2 3.2 3.2

Nigeria 7.3 7.3 7.3

Rwanda 2.1 2.1 2.1

Senegal -2.2 0 0

Sierra Leone 5.4 5.4 5.4

Sudan 7.6 7.6 7.6

South Africa 9.1 9.1 9.1

Tanzania 9.6 9.6 9.6

Uganda 5.6 5.6 5.6

Zambia 8.4 8.4 8.4

In July 2010, the ADB moved away from the UNDP based salary structures. The salary

structures are established for each field office in line with the movements in each market to

place them at the 75th percentile of this market.

Page | 6

Table (iii): Proposed Weighted Average Adjustments – Comparison between Consultant

proposals and Management proposals.

In July 2010, by approval of the Compensation framework ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/rev4, the

Bank moved away from automatic salary adjustments. The salary adjustments are

established for each office in line with the movements in each market to place them at the

75th percentile.

LOCATION

CONSULTANT

FINDINGS VIS-À-VIS THE

WEIGHTED AVERAGE

75th

PERCENTILE

MANAGEMNT

RECOMMENDATIONS

BASED ON

CONSULTANT

PROPOSAL

GS (%) LP (%) GS (%) LP (%)

Algeria* 9.10 No staff 9.10 No staff

Angola No staff No staff No staff No staff

Burkina Faso 10.20 7.50 10.20 7.50

Cameroon 6.90 6.80 6.90 6.80

Chad 1.00 -4.10 1.00 0.00

DR Congo 10.80 13.70 10.80 13.70

Cote d'Ivoire** 16.30 No staff 5.10 No staff

Tunisia** -39.60 No staff 3.00 No staff

Egypt -3.60 -5.20 0.00 0.00

Ethiopia -1.00 17.90 0.00 17.90

Gabon -1.50 6.20 0.00 6.20

Ghana 5.80 29.90 5.80 29.90

Kenya 4.00 -11.00 4.00 0.00

Madagascar -5.90 -4.40 0.00 0.00

Malawi -6.30 5.40 0.00 5.40

Mali -11.40 -12.20 0.00 0.00

Morocco -11.10 3.10 0.00 3.10

Mozambique -14.70 -4.70 0.00 0.00

Nigeria 0.00 -5.20 0.00 0.00

Rwanda -5.50 -13.40 0.00 0.00

Senegal -6.70 11.40 0.00 11.40

Sierra Leone 3.90 -16.90 3.90 0.00

Sudan -20.90 No staff 0.00 No staff

South Africa* 24.00 25.10 24.00 25.10

Tanzania -7.30 -17.60 0.00 0.00

Uganda -0.40 -10.20 0.00 0.00

Zambia 4.20 14.00 4.20 14.00

*For South Africa and Algeria, the adjustment is vis-à-vis the UNDP grid as these offices were

not operational in 2009 and hence the staff did not get any salary adjustments vis-à-vis the

UNDP grids.

** This calculation is based in the entire HQ based GS staff group (Abidjan/Tunis).

Page | 7

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Board of Directors of the African Development bank on 18th

July 2003 considered

and endorsed Management’s proposal on the Legal and Policy Framework governing the

Status of Staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Mission Regime

(ADB/BD/WP/2003/77). The Board discussed the Framework within the context of the general

principle contained in article 4 of the General Regulations of the Bank (Adopted by the Board

of Governors of the Bank), as well as the consultative provisions contained in Staff Regulation

2.13 adopted by the Board of Directors on 20 March 1998. The document on the status of staff

in the context of the Temporary Relocation Mission Regime (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77)

specifically indicated that for the purposes of the annual adjustment of GS staff salary as

prescribed in Staff Regulation 5.4, the basis for a decision would continue to be a survey of

other organizations based in Abidjan. This decision was further endorsed during the review of

the Compensation Framework 2008-2012 (ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/Rev4).

A legal note (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77/Add.1) provided by the General Counsel indicated that,

the Board of Governors having decided that the Headquarters of the Bank shall remain in

Abidjan, any decision by a subordinate rule-making organ should be consistent with and not

derogate from, this decision of the Board of Governors.

Based on all these observations and approvals, Management issued the PD 02/2003 concerning

the implementation of the temporary relocation regime which together with the Board of

Governors Resolutions, Board of Directors resolution continue to govern the salary adjustment

mechanism and contracts for Head Quarters Based locally recruited staff.

Since its relocation to Tunis in 2003, the Bank has taken several measures to minimize the

impacts of relocation on locally recruited staff members relocated from Abidjan. Education

costs for children attending school in Tunis are covered up to 90% instead of 80% applied to

other staff, with the same ceiling as applied to internationally-recruited staff members. GS

staff relocated to Tunis also continue to receive a temporary relocation monthly allowance

of UA 330 although this allowance has now been discontinued for the international

category professional level (PL) staff relocated to Tunis. The staff members also receive

home leave payments based on air travel from Tunis to Abidjan every two years The

payment to Abidjan-based staff of the security allowance equivalent to 12.5% of the salary

has also been discontinued with effect from 1 January 2010, in view of Côte d’Ivoire’s

return to Phase 2 of the United Nations security system. Finally, some staff members in

this category have continued to benefit from the voluntary separation programmes for those

who chose to separate from the Bank’s service.

1.2 In accordance with the resolutions adopted on 27 September 1999 and 13 November

2002, the Board of Directors of the Bank and Fund decided to establish a network of Field

Offices (FO) in the Regional Member Countries and authorized Management to gradually open

Offices in certain member countries. To that end, the Boards in June 2004 approved a

Decentralization Strategy (ADF/BD/WP/2004/84/Rev.1) providing for the opening of up to 25

offices in the following countries: Algeria, Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Ghana,

Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Malawi, Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda,

Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Chad,

Tunisia and Zambia. Subsequently, an Office was opened in South Africa, and the Board of

Directors has recently approved the Bank’s proposal to establish a Country Office in

Zimbabwe.

Page | 8

The establishment of these Offices has improved dialogue with the countries, enhanced the

Bank’s visibility, strengthened portfolio management and improved coordination with the

other donors. To enable the Field Offices fully play their role, Management has provided them

with the necessary competencies, through a mix of international staff members transferred

from headquarters and locally-recruited staff who meet the requirements of the positions to be

filled.

1.3 Management is convinced that without an acceptable compensation package, the Bank

will encounter difficulties in making these offices competitive in attracting, motivating and

retaining the skills required to ensure effective decentralization. It is against this backdrop that

several measures have been envisaged to improve the existing human resource policy

concerning the Field Offices.

Following a complete study of the Bank’s compensation system, the Board of Directors on 15

July 2008 adopted a new Compensation Framework aligned with the Human Resource

Strategy approved by the Bank in 2007. This new framework made possible the necessary

adjustments to the Bank’s salary policy and the restructuring of benefits provided to staff, so as

to free up resources to finance the enhanced market positioning. The new Compensation

Framework has also made it possible to extend some benefits to locally-recruited Field

Office staff and made provision for the introduction of a Bank-specific job classification

system for this category, as well as the regular adjustment of their salaries based on the

findings of annual salary surveys on the local markets of each host country. Finally, it has

given them regular Bank staff status, which now entitles them to the same terms of

employment as their counterparts at headquarters.

1.4 For 2010, the Board of Directors approved, for HQ locally recruited staff, a weighted

average actual salary increase of 7.5 % and a 5.5% increase in the salary structure,

positioning the Bank at the 75th percentile of the approved reference market. The increases

approved by the Board of Directors to position the salaries of FO locally recruited staff at

the 75th percentile of the market, or take into account the inflation rate in the country, varied

from 1.5% to 46.9%, depending on the category (GS, LP).

1.5 For 2011, Management is hereby submitting, for consideration by the Board of

Directors, proposals for salary scale adjustment and salary increases in accordance with the

duty stations and the survey conclusions.

1.6 In addition to the Introduction, this document comprises six (6) parts: The first concerns

the context for the salary review, the second sets out the objectives of the Compensation

Framework, the third part states the terms of employment of locally recruited staff, the fourth

part reviews the Consulting Firm’s conclusions and recommendations while the fifth part

presents Management’s analyses and conclusions. The sixth and last part considers the measures

envisaged and recommendations made by Management.

The Consulting Firm’s report is provided as an addendum to this document.

Page | 9

2. SALARY REVIEW CONTEXT

2.1 Outline

As part of its Human Resources Strategy (2007-2011) and its Institutional Services Reform

Programme, the Bank has actively endeavored to provide high quality benefits and to attract

and retain a diversified staff. This chapter briefly discusses this context and the achievements

in the areas of human resource reform and decentralization.

2.2 Implementation of the Human Resource Reforms

On the basis of the 2007 Human Resources Management Strategy and the Strategic

Framework, the Bank has adopted a concerted approach to the finalization of the Learning

and Retraining Strategy, which aims to build its internal capacities which should impact the

quality of its services to regional member countries. It recently finalized the first module of

the Leadership and Management Retraining Programme, with an internationally renowned

business school, the United Kingdom’s Cranfield School of Management, and embarked upon

an ambitious training and retraining programme for Field Office staff with Mane Gere

Associates. In addition, the Career Development Framework, an initiative comprising a

series of 6 interdependent interventions (promotion, individual retraining plan, performance

management, mobility, selection and recruitment, and reward) used in managing the career

paths of managerial and non-managerial staff, has been launched. In order to pursue capacity

building by recruiting and retaining staff, the Recruitment Manual has been revised as a

benchmark for all tasks concerning recruitment to GS, PL and EL positions, as well as internal

promotion on the basis of competition. The job classification for locally-recruited Field

Office Staff has also been completed, to support the implementation of the new Compensation

Framework. The Bank’s unfailing concern for its staff’s wellbeing has resulted in Guidelines

for HIV/AIDS with a view to managing the delicate issue of HIV/AIDS in the work place.

Furthermore, ambitious efforts are underway to complete, in the next twelve months, essential

policy documents on the Extension of the Mandatory Retirement Age, The Young

Professional’s Program, Review of the Staff Individual Study Program, Diversity report

and Action Plan, Job Classification and Realignment of Salary Grades, Mid-Term

Review of the Compensation Framework, the Annual Medical Report, Technical

Assistance Personnel Guidelines, the Performance Management System review, the

Mutually Agreed Separation Policy and Revision of Staff Rules. Last but not least,

Management has organized a follow up Staff Survey, launched in September 2010.

The Bank is aware of the difficulties to be overcome to achieve the above-mentioned

objectives with limited resources, but is determined to act in conjunction with the different

parties and stakeholders to obtain positive results.

2.3 Acceleration of the Decentralization Process

The decentralization process has followed a well thought-out and gradual approach. The

number of active Field Offices has increased from 4 in 2002 to 25 in 2009, with a total staff of

409 international and local staff, i.e. about 21 % of the total number of Bank positions. The

transfer of functions and responsibilities has been carried out on the basis of the countries’

needs and the staff capacities. A number of Offices have staff covering more than one country.

Page | 10

An independent assessment conducted by the Operations Evaluation Department (OPEV) in

2008, concluded that the implementation of the existing strategy was well advanced. OPEV

determined that the decentralization had contributed to: i) improving portfolio management;

ii) improving the Bank’s responsiveness and country policy dialogue capacities; iii) enhanced

the Bank’s visibility in regional member countries and coordination with donor partners. In its

section dedicated to the African Development Bank, the 2009 Multilateral Organization

Performance Assessment (MOPAN) report also noted s the Bank’s increased commitment as

well as the strengthening of its dialogue with clients and other development partners.

On 21 June 2010, the Board of Directors approved the Bank’s proposal to open a Country

Office in Harare, Zimbabwe to consolidate the Bank’s presence in the country.

The Bank began opening offices in regional member countries in 1999 driven by client

demand for stronger commitment, shorter project implementation periods and more efficient

implementation. Over time, the lessons learnt from the experience of the Bank and other actors

have been taken into account.

The Group’s financial situation and the development impact and quality of the Bank’s

operations were examined in the document on salary adjustments for international PL staff.

Page | 11

3. COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK OBJECTIVES 3.1 Reference Market and Positioning

The Compensation Framework approved by the Board identified as comparators a group of at

least the ten (10) best employers, where possible, in each local market, including public

organizations, private firms, international humanitarian organizations, bilateral agencies and

Embassies. The Board of Directors approved a 75th percentile positioning as the target market

position for all locally-recruited staff. As in the past, and as in the case of the internationally

recruited staff, the Bank the services of an international consulting firm to compare the Bank

with the market data.

The countries were split into two groups: Group 1 comprising a sample of 15 employers in

countries with larger, more diverse labor markets, and Group 2, a sample of 10 employers in

countries with smaller and less diverse labor markets. The United Nations Development

Program (UNDP) and the World Bank were selected for all the countries, as international

public sector benchmark institutions with which the Bank shares the local talent pool.

An indicative breakdown of the number of comparators to be selected by activity sector,

depending on the level of the local market, is indicated below:

Table 3.1: Breakdown of Comparators

Sector Group

1

Group

2

World Bank 1 1

United Nations 1 1

Bilateral Agencies 3-5 2-3

Embassies 2 1

International Humanitarian Organizations 0-2 0-1

Other Public 2-4 2-3

Private 4-6 2-3

TOTAL 15 10

In selecting the comparators, Management has, to the extent possible, maintained the same

organizations for each sector across the country group, to ensure consistency of salary data and

equity amongst the field offices.

This year, Management has, with the participation of all the offices, revised the lists used

for the 2011 exercise. Some offices have submitted new lists to Management. However,

considering the difficulty of submitting proposals on the adjustment of Bank staff salary

review to the Board of Directors for discussion before the approval of the 2011 budget,

Management has maintained the same comparators as in 2010. Nevertheless, the following

measures have been implemented to take the offices’ concerns into account:

i) Removal from the existing lists of comparators whose salary averages are very low in

comparison to other comparators, which has helped increase the weighted averages of the

reference markets in the countries concerned, such as Mali, Morocco, Rwanda, Sierra Leone,

Sudan, Tanzania, Madagascar and Uganda; and

Page | 12

ii) Revision in 2011 of comparator lists for all interested offices, in order to have a stable

and acceptable list for future exercises.

The Bank is working with the consultants to ensure that we reach the targeted at least 10

comparators (for the smaller markets) and at least 15 comparators (for the larger markets). The

cycle for 2011 is has already started in order to stabilize the number and type of comparators to

fit into the framework as approved by the Board. The Bank and the consultants have already

commenced the campaign in all the countries by visiting these bilateral lenders, development

partners and other sector comparators to ensure that they are included in the next cycle.

The list of all comparators selected for this year is presented by country in Annex 2.

3.2 Performance-Based Compensation

One of the key objectives of the new compensation policy is to enable the Bank to manage

all compensation (salaries and benefits) involving direct and indirect payments, in order to

reward strong performances. It was on this basis that the Board of Directors approved the

restructuring of staff benefits in order to release the resources earmarked for financing the

enhanced market positioning. Consequently, high performing staff members are rewarded

on the basis of their results and their contribution and enabled to support their personal

choices. Compensation reform was essential to support the new 360° performance

management system, which will make it possible, not only to reward the most outstanding

staff members, but also to identify the weakest.

Pursuant to Presidential Directive 04/2009 issued on 1 October 2009, concerning the staff

Performance Management System, a memorandum informed staff of the launching of an

electronic tool for implementation of the new Performance Management System, indicating the

different processes of the operation and the related cut-off dates. A complete schedule for the

performance evaluation process with detailed descriptions of the main stages and instructions

for staff, supervisors and multi-raters was also communicated. Prior to the operation’s start-up,

the Bank organized intensive training sessions at headquarters and in the Field Offices in order

to explain to staff how to use the tool on-line and to address their possible concerns. The 2009

Performance Evaluation was carried out according to the new procedures, especially on-line

evaluation and the weighting of objectives and key performance indicators.

The time taken to complete the 2009 evaluation process was the shortest in the Institution’s

history. The fact that the existing system is operational online and allows for easy monitoring

was a key factor in the significant completion rate.

The Bank is determined to introduce an enhanced performance management process, with the

performance management system constituting just one component. In that respect, continuing

training of supervisors and staff members in the conduct of the overall performance

management process will be organized. The responsibilities of staff members and their

supervisors in this process will be well defined. This will provide clear indications and raise

the efficacy of the performance rating during the evaluation exercise.

Page | 13

4. LOCALLY RECRUITED STAFF SERVICE CONDITIONS

4.1 In 2007 and 2008, the Board of Directors approved a series of measures to improve the

working conditions of locally recruited Field Office staff. In particular, the new provisions

cover the medical plan, the retirement plan, education grants and dependency allowances, as

well as the Group Accident and Life Insurance. The new Compensation Framework adopted

by the Board of Directors in July 2008 gave locally-recruited Field Office staff the status of

regular Bank staff. Performance evaluations and annual performance-based salary adjustments

were introduced in the Field Offices. In addition, the SAP NPO, ‘Salary Processing Project’

was introduced, thus permitting the central processing of all salaries and entitlements. This

reform helped to reduce the time devoted by staff to administrative matters, thereby creating

more time for operations-related activities. Field Office staff efficiency has improved due to

the strengthening of the orientation/ on-boarding and training programmes offered to locally-

recruited staff and Resident Representatives. Greater authority has been delegated to the

Resident Representatives for decision-making concerning the recruitment of locally recruited

staff.

4.2 On 15 April 2010, the Administrative Affairs and Human Resource Policy Committee

of the Board (CAHR) endorsed Management’s proposal for classification of locally- recruited

Field Office staff. The objectives of this proposal was to establish a benchmark value for all

Bank jobs, in an equitable, coherent and efficient manner and to provide a reliable basis for the

compensation system which laid the foundation for a salary policy to enable the Bank attract

and retain qualified staff.

4.3 In accordance with the provisions of the Compensation Framework adopted in July

2008, the salary adjustments for locally-recruited Field Office staff are applied under the same

conditions as those of headquarters staff with the same status. 2010 was the first year of

application of salary adjustments for this category of staff on the basis of their performance. In

2010, the inflation rate recorded in the country was also taken into account in calculating the

salary adjustments for each field office.

4.4 While the employment conditions of staff with international status are based on the

international labor market, those of locally recruited staff are based on local market conditions.

The locally recruited staff salaries correspond to the pay grades applied to staff at the different

Bank duty stations. Their salary scales are denominated in the local currency, except in the

cases of the Angola, DR Congo and Mozambique offices, which, falling in line with existing

local practices of other institutions, are denominated in American dollars.

4.5 The Board of Directors on 30 June 2010 approved a Bank-specific salary scale for each

Field Office. These scales will be revised annually on the basis of the findings of salary

surveys carried out on a sample of employers for each local market. The proposed salary

scales are presented in Annex 1.

Page | 14

5. CONSULTING FIRM’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Following these analyses, the Consulting firm drew conclusions enabling it to make

recommendations both for Headquarters and Field Office locally recruited staff.

5.1 Locally Recruited Headquarters’ Staff

As requested and in keeping with past practice and previous resolutions, the Consulting firm’s

analyses focused on the position of headquarters’ staff vis-à-vis the Abidjan market and

provided an analysis vis-à-vis the Tunis market for indicative purposes.

5.1.1 Abidjan Market

The Consulting firm’s analysis concerned salary structures and actual salaries. As in the

previous exercises, a distinction is made between staff with salaries within the salary scale and

those whose salaries, for historical reasons, are outside the salary scale.

5.1.1.1 Salary Structure

The comparison of salary structures shows that the scale of salaries of headquarters GS staff

whose salaries are within the salary grid is on average 5.1% lower than the 75th percentile of

the reference market as tabulated below.

Table: 5.1.1.1: Bank Salary Structure vis-à-vis 75th Percentile of the Abidjan Market

Gra

de

Current

Minimum

75th

Percentile

Minimum

Difference

from Minimum

Current

Maximum

75th

Percentile

Maximum

Difference

from

Maximum

Mean

Difference

(FCFA) (FCFA) (FCFA) (FCFA) % %

GS3

4,826,0

00

5,168,033 7.1%

8,446,000

9,722,091 15.1% 11.1%

GS4

6,274,0

00

6,782,166 8.1%

10,980,000

12,399,582 12.9% 10.5%

GS5

7,906,0

00

9,395,757 18.8%

13,835,000

13,212,058 -4.5% 7.2%

GS6

9,882,0

00

9,813,027 -0.7%

17,294,000

18,671,257 8.0% 3.6%

GS7

12,353,

000

12,770,855 3.4%

21,617,000

22,350,852 3.4% 3.4%

GS8

15,441,

000

16,669,977 8.0%

27,022,000

28,658,324 6.1% 7.0%

Weighted

Average 5.1%

5.1. 1. 2 Average Actual Salaries

The comparison of the actual salaries of headquarters GS staff with the Abidjan reference

market shows that the Bank’s weighted average is 16.3% below that reference market as

shown in the table below.

Page | 15

Table: 5.1.1.2: Bank Average Actual Salaries vis-à-vis the Abidjan Market

Grade Actual Average 75th

Percentile of Market Average Difference

(Market)

(FCFA) (FCFA) %

GS 3 5,694,520 7,658,452 34.5%

GS 4 7,228,562 9,407,058 30.1%

GS 5 9,609,946 11,340,511 18.0%

GS 6 12,521,590 14,242,142 13.7%

GS 7 15,091,664 16,970,229 12.4%

GS 8 18,289,687 22,139,041 21.0%

Weighted Average: 16.3%

The consultant noted that the huge gap was due to demographic changes in GS support staff.

5.1.2 Tunis Market

5.1.2.1 Salary Structure

The comparison shows that the Bank’s salary structure remains competitive this year, in

relation to the Tunis reference market as seen in the Table below:

Table: 5.1.2.1 Salary Structure vis-à-vis 75th Percentile of the Tunis Market (TND)

Grade

Current

Minimum

75th

Percentile

Difference

from

Minimum

Current

Maximum

75th

Percentile from

Maximum

Difference

Average

GS3 15,464 11,683 -24.5% 27,062 15,689 -42.0% -33.2%

GS4 19,474 12,748 -34.5% 34,079 18,499 -45.7% -40.1%

GS5 23,941 13,860 -42.1% 41,897 18,591 -55.6% -48.9%

GS6 29,439 15,853 -46.2% 51,519 24,669 -52.1% -49.1%

GS7 36,799 19,133 -48.0% 64,406 30,749 -52.3% -50.1%

GS8 47,109 23,556 -50.0% 82,448 31,469 -61.8% -55.9%

Weighted

Average -49.5%

5.1.2.2 Average Actual Salaries

The comparison of actual salaries with the Tunis reference market shows that, again, this year,

the Bank’s actual salaries are competitive as seen from the Table below.

Table: 5.1.2.2 Bank Average Actual Salaries vis-à-vis the Tunis Market

Grade Actual Average 75th

Percentile of Market Average Market

Difference

(TND) (TND) % GS 3 15,582 13,156 -15.6%

GS 4 19,779 15,125 -23.5%

GS 5 26,295 16,751 -36.3%

GS 6 34,262 19,972 -41.7%

GS 7 41,295 24,150 -41.5%

GS 8 50,045 27,315 -45.4%

Weighted Average: -39.6%

Page | 16

5.2 Locally Recruited Field Office Staff

The Consulting Firm carried out an analysis of salary data for all Field Office staff at post at 31

July 2010. Unlike last year, when the Consulting firm’s comparisons focused solely on actual

salaries, these have been expanded to include salary structures, as the Bank now has its own

salary structure for each Field office since 1 July 2010.

5.2.1 Bank Salary Structures vis-à-vis the Reference Market

The comparisons between the Field Office salary structures vis-à-vis the reference markets

show that most of the Bank’s salary structures are below the 75th

percentile market target

approved by the Board of Directors.

5.2.2 Bank Average Actual Salaries vis-à-vis the Reference Market

The comparisons between the Bank’s salary data and those of the local reference market shows

that the Bank’s position on the local market varies from country to country.

5.3 Consulting Firm’s Recommendations

5.3.1 Salary Structures

With a view to positioning the salaries of Bank locally recruited staff at the 75th percentile of

the reference market in all duty stations, the Consulting Firm has made recommendations for

adjustments ranging from 0% to 10.8%, as indicated in Table 5.3

Based on the proposed weighted averages for adjustment, the Consulting Firm has proposed

for headquarters’ and Field Office staff the salary scales presented in Annex 1.

5.3.2 Actual Salaries

To position the averages of locally recruited Field Office staff salaries at the 75th percentile of

the reference market in all the duty stations, the Consulting Firm has recommended weighted

average increases ranging from 0% to 29.9% as indicated in the following Table.

Page | 17

Table 5.3: Salary Adjustments Proposed by the Consulting Firm

Field Offices

Salary Structure

Adjustments %

Weighted Average Salary Increases

%

GS LP

South Africa 9.1 24 25.1

Algeria 3.4 9.1

Angola 4.3

Burkina Faso 9.1 10.2 7.5

Cameroon 4.5 6.9 6.8

Cote d'Ivoire 0 5.1

Tunisia 0 3.0

Egypt 5.9 0 0

Ethiopia 5.2 0 17.9

Gabon 2.8 0 6.2

Ghana 8.4 5.8 29.9

Kenya 10.8 4 0

Madagascar 7.9 0 0

Malawi 5.2 0 5.4

Mali 0 0 0

Morocco 0 0 3.1

Mozambique 3.2 0 0

Nigeria 7.3 0 0

Uganda 5.6 0 0

DR Congo 8.4 10.8 13.7

Rwanda 2.1 0 0

Senegal 0 0 11.4

Sierra Leone 5.4 3.9 0

Sudan 7.6 0

Tanzania 9.6 0 0

Chad 1.9 1 0

Zambia 8.4 4.2 14

Page | 18

6. MANAGEMENT’S ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 Headquarters Staff

Headquarters GS staff comprises staff who remained in Abidjan, staff transferred from Abidjan

to Tunis and staff recruited in Tunis. As in previous years, the reference market remains that of

Abidjan, though the Bank is still temporarily relocated to Tunis. Finally, as in the past and at

the Board’s request, a comparison continues to be made with the Tunis market.

6.1.1 Positioning of Actual Salaries in relation to the Current Salary Scale

The disaggregation of actual salaries of headquarters’ locally recruited staff members as at 1

July 2010 has led to their classification into three categories, as shown in the following Table:

Table 6.1.1.1: Disaggregation of salaries in thousand CFA francs

Grade Staffing Market

Staff Below the Current

Mid Point

Staff above the Current

Mid Point

Staff Above the

Current Maxima

GS

Total

Staffing

75th

Percentile Number Average Number Average Number Average

1 1 7,658,452 1 8,809,845

2 6 7,658,452 6 4,891,998 0 0

3 14 7,658,452 13 5,694,520 0 1 15,227,079

4 20 9,407,058 14 7,106,330 1 7,220,922 5 15,738,231

5 95 11,340,511 52 8,065,574 27 12,422,909 16 16,821,918

6 117 14,242,142 72 10,902,427 38 15,589,478 7 18,628,170

7 150 16,970,229 111 13,908,490 38 18,547,778 1 27,138,064

8 54 22,139,041 45 17,119,738 9 23,437,463 0

457 313 113 31

100% 68% 25% 7%

Staff whose salaries are below the mid point. The weighted averages of these staff

members’ salaries are also below the 75th percentile of the reference market.

Staff whose salaries are above the mid point.

Staff whose salaries exceed the maxima: The Bank’s efforts to standardize the salaries

of its GS staff continue to be fruitful, as shown in the Table below. The numbers will

decline to 21 as at the end of the year as a result of the voluntary separation programme,

normal departures and internal promotions.

Table 6.1.1.2 Trend Analysis of Staff with salaries above the Salary Scale

Yea

r

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 July

2010

Staff 311 288 204 180 140 115 97 88 75 63 40 31

6.1.2 Gap between Bank Actual Salaries and the Market

In 2010, the Bank took the following measures concerning headquarters GS staff:

A salary structure adjustment of 5.5% to position the salary scale at the 75th

percentile

of the market;

Page | 19

A weighted average actual salary increase of 7.5% for staff members whose salary is

within the salary scale in order to improve its positioning on the reference market; and

For the current year, the study shows that Bank’s actual salary structure and salaries lag the

75th percentile by 5.1% and 16.3% respectively, for the following main reasons:

The salary structure: fewer movements in the comparators’ scales.

Actual salaries: In 2010, the gap between the Bank’s weighted average actual salaries

and the targeted 75th percentile of the market was 17.2%. But a 7.5% adjustment was

recommended and approved. Furthermore, from January to July 2010 there were massive

demographic changes at the Bank vis-à-vis comparators. The Bank recruited 39 new GS staff

members at headquarters and promoted 14 GS staff members to higher grades in the same

category. These staff members are generally recruited at the entry salaries for their respective

grades. Furthermore, for the same period, the Bank recorded 26 departures of GS staff

members, including17 under the voluntary separation programme, and all of whom had high

salaries.

On the other hand, the average salaries of these staff members with salaries exceeding the

Bank’s ceiling remain, this year as well, far above the 75th percentile target of the reference

market. A comparison shows the weighted average of salaries of this staff category to be 32.5%

over the market already, which explains why no actual salary increase is envisaged for this staff

category.

6.2 Field Office Staff

Locally-recruited Field Office staff comprise general services staff (GS) and professional staff

(LP).

6.2.1 Bank’s Salary Structures

Since 1 July 2010, the Bank has a salary scale for each Field Office. These scales were

formulated on the basis of the findings of the salary surveys conducted by the Consulting Firm.

For 2011 projections, they have been used as benchmarks for comparison with the reference

market. The analysis of data provided by the Consulting Firm shows that, in almost 90% of

cases, the Bank’s salary structures are below the targeted 75th

percentile of the different

reference markets, as shown in Table 6.2.1 below:

Page | 20

Table 6.2.1: Differences between the Salary Structures and the Reference Market

Offices Percentage Differences

South Africa 9.1

Algeria 3.4

Angola 4.3

Burkina Faso 9.1

Cameroon 4.5

Cote d'Ivoire 5.1

Tunisia -49.5

Egypt 5.9

Ethiopia 5.2

Gabon 2.8

Ghana 8.4

Kenya 10.8

Madagascar 7.9

Malawi 5.2

Mali -1.3

Morocco -1.6

Mozambique 3.2

Nigeria 7.3

Uganda 5.6

DR Congo 8.4

Rwanda 2.1

Senegal -2.2

Sierra Leone 5.4

Sudan 7.6

Tanzania 9.6

Chad 1.9

Zambia 8.4

6.2.2 Weighted Average Actual Salaries

The comparison reveals three situations:

Offices with weighted averages of staff salaries above the 75th percentile of the local reference

market: For these offices, no salary adjustment is required on the basis of the market

positioning.

Offices with weighted averages of the salaries of staff in a particular category (GS, LP) above

or below the 75th percentile of the local reference market: for the salaries of these Offices

above the 75th percentile of the local market, no salary adjustment on the basis of market

positioning is required, while increases are required for those with salaries below the Bank’s

target, to position them at the reference market target.

Page | 21

Offices with weighted average staff salaries below the 75th percentile of the local reference

market: to position the salary averages of these offices at the set target, adjustments are

required.

A comparison of the Bank’s positions in 2010, with those of 2009, shows that there are

significantly fewer differences between the market and the Bank as shown in Table 6.2.2

below.

Table 6.2.2: Comparative Differences between Averages of Bank Actual Salaries and the

Market

Field Offices

2009 % differences

2010 % differences

GS LP GS LP

Algeria N/A N/A 9.1

South Africa N/A N/A 24 25.1

Angola N/A N/A N/A N/A

Burkina Faso 7 11.6 10.2 7.5

Cameroon 5.9 3.8 6.9 6.8

Egypt -6.5 -7.2 -3.6 -5.2

Ethiopia -22.7 20.6 -1 17.9

Gabon 10.3 30.2 -1.5 6.2

Ghana 6.5 46.9 5.8 29.9

Kenya 7.3 -10.9 4 -11

Madagascar -11.7 -14.3 -5.9 -4.4

Malawi -6.8 0.9 -6.3 5.4

Mali -13.9 -10 -11.4 -12.2

Morocco -12.9 10.6 -11.1 3.1

Mozambique -22.5 -7.2 -14.7 -4.7

Nigeria 16.4 34.5 0 -5.2

Uganda -0.8 -19.4 -0.4 -10.2

DR Congo 10.8 31.5 10.8 13.7

Rwanda -14.5 -22.8 -5.5 -13.4

Senegal 1.2 23.1 -6.7 11.4

Sierra Leone -0.2 -30.6 3.9 -16.9

Sudan -26.5 N/A -20.9 N/A

Tanzania -20 -25.2 -7.3 -17.6

Chad 7.7 -2.2 1 -4.1

Zambia 0.7 32.4 4.2 14

It should be noted that the conclusions concerned the overall weighted averages, given

that disparities were noted between grades and at the individual level.

Page | 22

7 MEASURES ENVISAGED AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Following the Consulting firm’s analyses and taking into account the approved compensation

framework, Management has made recommendations for salary adjustments for locally-

recruited staff.

7.1 Salary Increase Matrix

The salary adjustments will be applied to staff members in accordance with the new

performance evaluation system. In order to take into account internal equity issues, staff

members at the lowest levels will, for equal performance, be awarded higher salaries than those

of staff members in the highest ranges. Similarly, staff members with the strongest

performances will be rewarded with higher percentages than other staff members.

As in the past, staff members who joined the Bank in the 4th quarter of 2010 (whose period of

employment is too short for a meaningful performance evaluation) will not receive

performance based increases. Also, only staff members evaluated in respect of 2010 and in

service as at 1 January 2011 will benefit from the proposed salary adjustments.

7.2 Financial Impact

The proposed salary adjustments will result in an estimated payroll increase (salaries, pensions,

dependency allowances, medical contributions) of six hundred and twenty four thousand, five

hundred and twenty six Units of Account (UA 624,536) in order to achieve the targeted 75th

percentile of the market approved by the Board of Directors.

Table 7.2: Financial Impact

Items Amount in UA

Salary Increases 487,919

Pensions, Dependency Allowances, Medical Contributions 136,617

Total 624,536

7.3 Positioning of Headquarter based GS staff

Management divided this group of staff into two categories i.e. (a) staff based in Abidjan

and (b) Staff based in Tunis. For the staff based in Abidjan, the comparison with the Abidjan

market showed that the salary structure and the actual average salaries were below the

Abidjan market by 5.1% and 14.96% respectively. For the staff based in Tunis the analysis

shows that the salary structure and the actual average salaries were below the Abidjan

market by 5.1% and 16.43% respectively. However, the salary structure and actual average

salaries were above the Tunis market by 49.50% and 39.91% respectively. Out of the 390

total GS staff based in Tunis, 178 staff were relocated from Abidjan to Tunis and 212 staff

have been recruited in Tunis.

In view of the underlying legal and policy framework (Policy Framework governing the

Status of Staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Extended Mission Regime

(ADB/BD/WP/2003/77) approved on 18 July 2003 and the Compensation Framework

(ADB/BD/WP/123/REV4) approved on 15 July 2008), the use of Abidjan as reference for

the GS staff salary adjustment was and continues to remain valid. To change this methodology

Page | 23

would amount to introducing a new regime of expatriate status for the GS staff which may be

financially more expensive for the Bank3.

The consultant recommended an average actual salary increase of 5.1% and a structure

increase of 5.1%. However, considering, the Bank’s length of stay in Tunis and the change in

demographics whereby all the new staff have been recruited in Tunis since the relocation,

management proposes, for the staff based in Tunis, a 3.0% weighted average increase in actual

salaries which is more or less equivalent to the estimated rate of inflation in the Tunisia4.

For the 36 staff based in Abidjan, Management proposes to offer a weighted average salary

increase of 5.1% as recommended by the consultant.

Based on the fact that management is no longer recruiting new staff in Abidjan and that the

current salary grid remains competitive vis-à-vis the Tunis market, Management proposes to

maintain the salary scale at the 2010 levels.

7.4 Management's Recommendations

7.4.1 Based on the survey findings, and provisions of the Compensation Framework,

Management proposes the following recommendations:

Adjustment or the maintaining of the current salaries salary structure of HQ and FO

locally recruited staff to the 75th percentile of the reference market as indicated in Table 5.3, in

order to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

Weighted average increases in the actual salaries of locally recruited staff, as indicated

in Table 5.3, to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

Approval of an amount six hundred and twenty four thousand, five hundred and twenty

six Units of Account (UA 624,536) and its inclusion in the 2011 Budget to support the

proposed adjustments and their impact on the payroll (salaries, pensions, dependency

allowances and medical contributions), in order to achieve the 75th

market percentile target as

approved by the Board of Directors; and

Adoption of the salary scales in Annex 1, effective 1 January 2011.

7.4.2 Management invites the Board of Directors to note that:-

the proposed increases will be applied on the basis of the 2010 performance evaluation

results and the positioning of each staff member concerned on the salary scale and, in the

case of staff recruited in 2010, in proportion to the period of employment at the Bank. The

proposed measures -will be effective 1 January 2011.

a review for the total compensation framework will also be launched for locally

recruited staff.

3 Legal Note issued by the General Counsel ( Ref ADB/BD/WP/2003/77/Add 1) and

ADB/BD/WP/2010/137/Rev.1/Add.2 4 Source. ESTA March 2010.

Page | 24

ANNEX1

Locally-Recruited Staff Salary Structures for 2011

Page | 25

Page | 26

Page | 27

Page | 28

Page | 29

Page | 30

Page | 31

Page | 32

Page | 33

Page | 34

Page | 35

Page | 36

Page | 37

Page | 38

ANNEX 2

Comparator Lists by Country

Offices

Comparators

Offices

Comparators

Algeria

1- Canadian Embassy

2- CitiBank

3- Embassy of the United States

4- European Union

5- GSK

6- Nokia Siemens Networks

7- Pfizer

8- United Nations

9- World Bank

Mali

1- Canadian Embassy

2- Embassy of Netherlands

3- European Union

4- Orange Mali

5- United Nations

6- World Bank

Angola 1- Banco African de Investimentos

2- British American Tobacco

3- Chevron Oil

4- Coca-Cola

5- Embassy of United States

6- European Union

7- Halliburton

8- OPS

9- United Nations

10- World Bank

Morocco

1- Canadian Embassy

2- European Union


4- Pfizer

5- Procter & Gamble

6- United Nations

7- USAID

8- World Bank

Burkina

Faso

1- Bank of Africa

2- Canadian Embassy

3- Ecobank


5- European Union

6- Millennium Challenge Account

7- UEMOA

8- United Nations

9- World Bank

Mozambique

1- Banco de Mocambique

2- Canadian Embassy

3- Ernst & Young

4- European Union

5- Total Mozambique

6- United Nations

7- USAID

8- World Bank

Cameroon

1- CitiBank

2- Colgate-Palmolive



5- European Union

6- GTZ

7- Price Waterhouse Coopers

8- Standard Chartered Bank

9- United Nations

10- World Bank

Nigeria

1- Africa Finance Corporation


3- Canadian Embassy

4- CitiBank


6- European Union

7- GT Bank

8- Halliburton

9- Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Ltd

10- Schlumberger

11- Stanbic IBTC Bank PLC

12- Unilever

13- United Nations

14- USAID

15- World Bank

Chad 1- BEAC – Bank of Central African States

2- Swiss Cooperation

3- Ecobank


5- European Union

6- United Nations

7- World Bank

Rwanda

1- Bralirwa

2- Canadian Embassy

3- DFID


5- European Union

6- MTN

7- United Nations

8- World Bank

Page | 39

DR Congo 1- Canadian Embassy

2- CitiBank


4- European Union

5- Stanbic Bank

6- United Nations

7- USAID

8- Vodacom

9- World Bank

Senegal

1- BCEAO


3- Canadian Embassy

4- CitiBank

5- Ecobank


7- European Union

8- International Development Research

Centre (CRDI)


10- OXFAM-GB

11- Pfizer

12- Philip Morris

13- United Nations

14- USAID

15- World Bank

Côte d’Ivoire 1- ADM COCOA SIFCA

2- Canadian Embassy

3- Chevron

4- CitiBank

5- Ecobank


7- European Union

8- Puma Energy

9- United Nations

World Bank

Sierra Leone


2- European Union

3- National Revenue Authority

4- Rokel Commercial Bank

5- Sierra Leone Commercial Bank


7- United Nations

8- World Bank

Egypt 1- AFREXIMBANK

2- Canadian Embassy

3- Embassy of Australia

4- Embassy of the Federal Republic of

Germany

5- Embassy of the Netherlands

6- European Union

7- Fulbright Commission

8- General Dynamics

9- International Development Research Centre

(IDRC)

10- Nestle


12- United Nations

13- USAID

14- World Bank

South Africa

1- Arcelor Mittal

2- Canadian Embassy

3- CitiBank

4- Coca Cola

5- Colgate Palmolive

6- DeBeers


8- European Union

9- IBM

10- Ranbaxy

11- Unilever

12- United Nations

13- USAID

14- Vale

15- World Bank

Ethiopia

1- African Union

2- Department for International Development

(DFID)

3- Desert Locust Control


5- Embassy of Sweden

6- Ericsson

7- European Union

8- International Committee of the Red Cross

(ICRC)


10- Oilibya Ethiopia Ltd.

11- Save the Children

12- Tobacco Marketing Consultants

13- United Nations

14- USAID

15- World Bank

Sudan

1- Canadian Embassy


3- Ericsson AB

4- European Union

5- MTN

6- United Nations

7- USAID

8- World Bank

Page | 40

Gabon

1- CitiBank

2- Elf Exploration


4- European Union

5- Nestlé

6- UBA Bank

7- United Nations

8- World Bank

Tanzania

1- CitiBank


3- European Union


5- Tanzania Communication Regulatory

Authority

6- United Nations

7- World Bank

Ghana

1- African Center for Economic Transformation

(ACET)

2- African Mining Services

3- AngloGold Ashanti

4- Australian High Commission

5- CAL Bank Ltd


7- European Union

8- Golden Star Resources

9- Newmont Mining

10- TiGO

8- Unilever

9- United Nations

10- USAID

11- Vega Foods Corp

15- World Bank

Tunisia

(TAR)

1- Aventis-Sanofi

2- Baxter

3- Canadian Embassy

4- CitiBank

5- Crown Maghreb Can



8- European Union

9- IBM

10- NCR


12- Pfizer

13- Unilever

14- United Nations

15- World Bank

Kenya

1- Barclays Bank


3- British High Commission

4- Canadian Embassy

5- CitiBank

6- Colgate Palmolive

7- European Union

8- Kenya Commercial Bank

9- Libya Oil LTD



12- Unilever Kenya Ltd

13- United Nations

14- USAID

15- World Bank

Uganda

1- Bank of Uganda

2- Barclays Bank




6- European Union

7- MTN

8- United Nations

9- World Bank

Madagascar

1- Banque Centrale de Madagascar

2- European Union

3- United Nations

4- USAID

5- World Bank

6- Zain

Zambia

1- Bank of Zambia

2- Barclays Bank

3- Canadian Embassy

10- Communication Authority of Zambia

4- European Union

5- Stanbic Bank

6- United Nations

7- USAID

8- World Bank

9- ZESCO

Malawi

1- British Embassy

2- European Union

3- Privatisation Commission

4- Stancom Tobacco

5- United Nations

6- USAID

7- World Bank

Zimbabwe 1. African Capacity Building Foundation

2. Embassy Of Australia

3. Embassy Of Canada

4. Embassy Of Netherlands

5- Embassy Of United States

6. European Union

7- United Nations

8- World Bank

Documents

Proposals for the Adjustment of the Salaries of Locally …€¦ · · 2014-07-02minimum of the new salary structure after the application of the performance based increase. Except