Section 3.5 asks for defensible internal relationship guidelines and an evaluation of compaction and inversion across rank and file, middle and senior management. These are the relationships the published schedules already set. The study adds where employees actually sit.
Career series, as published
Each row is one move up a series. "Differential" is the percentage between the two ranges (identical at every step, because both schedules step 5%). "Entry vs. top" compares the higher class's step 1 with the lower class's step 6; a negative figure means the ranges overlap.
Overlap checker
Pick a pair and a step for each. The checker reads the published schedules only. Real placements come from the District's payroll records at kickoff, under the NDA.
Method
Pay differences between levels shrink until they no longer reflect the difference in responsibility. We measure it three ways: range to range (this page), actual pay of each supervisor against the highest-paid direct report, and actual pay against time in class, so long-serving employees near the top of a range are visible.
A subordinate is paid more than the supervisor, or a lower level more than a higher one in the same series. Inversions are listed by position, with the cause (step placement, a promotion rule, a recent market adjustment) and an option to resolve each, as Section 3.6(6) requires.
Section 3.5(8) asks about overlap between rank and file, middle and senior management. Because the schedules share one ladder, the overlap between an Employees Association supervisor and a Teamsters manager reads directly in ranges, and the study can set group-to-group guidelines in the same unit.
When a recommended range moves, some employees can fall below the new minimum or above the new maximum. Section 3.6(5) asks how to treat them. We cost each option (bring to minimum, hold harmless with a frozen rate, phased placement) by position, so the Board sees the fiscal effect of the policy it chooses.