Videos and Webinars

Compensation, Retirement, Benefits Trends to Help Build Your Practice

Jan 14, 2019

In today’s economy, employee benefits remain a crucial factor in the recruitment and retention of top talent. What’s driving change in this area, and how will that impact the business of your plan sponsor clients in 2019?
Please join Newport Group for an advisor-centric analysis of trends captured in our latest Compensation, Retirement and Benefits Trends Report. As in previous years, The survey reveals key findings across a full range of compensation, retirement, health and welfare benefit programs and will provide insights into how plan sponsors' compensation, retirement and benefits issues offer areas of potential opportunity to help expand your practice and enhance your value.
We’ll also cover a number of topics including,
  • Retirement
  • Compensation practices
  • Compensation philosophy
  • Employee Incentives
  • Trends
We hope you’ll find this compensation and benefits trends webinar informative.

Click here to download a copy of this presentation.
Request the executive summary of the 2018/2019 Compensation, Retirement and Benefits Trends Report.
Test your knowledge. Click here to discover opportunities in employee benefits. 
Click here for a case study on Newport Group's deep dive into executive benefits with a large conglomerate. 

If you have additional questions about our Compensation Consulting services, click here.

Webinar Transcription

Rena: Welcome everyone, very excited to begin here, and we're going to start with a quick poll. Let's jump right in here. I want to ask you, those of you who are listening, to go ahead and think about what the most concerning of the compensation and benefits costs would be when you think about health and welfare plan costs, wage related costs, or retirement plan costs? You can go ahead and vote, and as you're doing that voting here, we're going to go through a lot of this, and we do at the end of the presentation, we've got some of the answers that participants put on. But I'm curious to see what the people online are thinking. There's a lot of you out there, so tell me what you're thinking here. And we'll close this panel, or this poll in just as second in here.

Rena: And I see 65% of you say that health and welfare plan costs are kind of the number one, followed by the compensation, wages and salary levels, and stuff like that, followed by retirement. Okay, interesting note there. Okay, very good. Well, our agenda today is going to be ... we're going to talk about the survey itself and some of the demographics of the participants. We'll jump into compensation practices, followed by retirement plans and then health and welfare benefits.

Rena: Michael at the beginning of the broadcast told us how you could put questions into the question pane throughout. We'll answer those with the time we've got, and then wrap ourselves up here. So, without further ado, I'm excited here to talk a little bit about the demographics. And by way of introduction, we all know that in this economy, it's really all about attracting and retaining the top talent. So, at Newport Group we know that you all want to what some of these key trends are, as you're trying to keep your comp and [inaudible 00:02:12] packages in line with your peers and the marketplace. And you're really trying to do that.

Rena: So, we've done this survey, there are highlights here from across 430 organizations, multitudes of industries. And we're going to talk about exactly who's in this data set. I want you to know also that at the bottom of the slide here you can see that if you see an N on the bottom of any one of these questions live as we're going through this, that's signifying it was already answered. And we're going to talk about mediums and averages both, because they tell slightly different stories. I'll point that out when that's relevant.

Rena: So, first of all, in terms of demographics, on the top right you're seeing really the size demographic. And over 60%, so that's 62 in the blues there, are representing the smaller companies. But it's about 40% that are in the 250 to 1,500 plus range. And from a location standpoint, the bottom pie, we've got a nice dispersion, a lot of Mid-West, but a nice dispersion across the whole US.

Rena: Now, industry is also widely represented in this survey. We have many different industries. You can see the highest contribution, that peak there is manufacturing, followed by the non-profit and healthcare. Finance and banking and construction are big industries. But there's scattering from a lot of different places. So, I think if you're interested in seeing certain data for your industry, for your sized company, make sure to write a little note to us at the end of the webinar, and I can get you any data that you're interested in.

Rena: All right. So, I am a compensation practice lead, and I'll take us on the journey through the big trends in compensation practices. I live here day in day out, this is kind of what I do for a living, is help organizations put these compensation plans and programs in place. So, I'll touch on salary increase, budgets, how our structure's moving. Different pay per performance trends, and the like.

Rena: The first question, and this is one of the fundamental questions of compensation that I hope you're all working with your executive teams on, and that is what is our company's total compensation philosophy? It's like trying to build a house without a blueprint, you really need to have an idea of what kind of comp and benefits you're targeting, who you're going to compare yourselves to in terms of industry competitors, locations and sizes, before you start down the path of actually providing those sorts of rewards.

Rena: So, we have participants, what their philosophies were. And you're seeing the answers in four buckets. Base salary from the bottom up, incentive comp, health and welfare, and retirement. So, the dark blue segment in the center of this graph is really saying that there's 81% would be in the bottom line here. 81% of organizations are positioning their base salary philosophy to kind of be inline at market. So, if you look at that, okay, the lighter blue to the left is positioned above market. Up the right, it's below market. And then no philosophy.

Rena: So, go up a level to incentive compensation. That is 18% are actually positioning their incentive comp programs to be above market. 18% haven't got a philosophy at all. Now, with health and welfare and retirement benefits, I find it interesting that organizations, close to 40%, are using their health and welfare benefit, or retirement, to sort of set themselves a little bit apart and have a good package from that standpoint, sort of rounded out if you will. So, it's a good question to ask, what's your total rewards, your total compensation and benefits philosophy and how do you stack up?

Rena: So, we always want to know if organizations are maximizing their return on the compensation dollars they send, by utilizing formal salary structures. These structures are ranges, they'll have a minimum salary for a job, and a maximum salary for a job. And these structures are administrative tools to allow the organization to manage the compensation spend, and ensure they're kind of being competitive. And they can benchmark, and benchmark those ranges to be competitive. We see that about 54% of our sample size do have the structures, and if you look at the table at the bottom here, you're going to see that as the organization gets bigger, they're more at this point in time to have these sorts of programs in place to manage structures.

Rena: Now, when you have a structure in place, we always want to ask the question of how much are these structures moving? And the movement in the structures I kind of call structures sometimes the funny one, right? Your practice, it's the administrative tool. You need to keep that structure in line with kind of the cost of living and the movement in the marketplace. So, keeping that structure, the structure tends to move about 2%. We're looking on the right side, that's the median. For the most part, that number has been at 2%. We see a little blip in the exec data for 2019 exempt employees, where they're putting that structure for exempt, employees are a bit higher, faster movement. But interesting here is the left side of the graph that is showing the averages. And the averages, the sort of lighter orange, is showing those average movements are about 2%. So, moving those structures, if you ask a lot of people when you find the middle number, the median, that's the 2% number, but structures are important to keep pace, right?

Rena: The other big question that you're going to get this from the CFO, from your board members, and the like, are what's the total anticipated salary budget increase? So, if I'm going to take my whole spend, what is that moving by? Now, there you've really got a lot of information. You've got information that's coming from you know, the cost of living, the cost of labor. Everything is all in when you talk about base salaries, total budget increases.

Rena: That number, if I asked most people on the street, they'd that that number's around 3%. That's what our median shows as well. That's the right side graph. But again, an interesting story, when we look at the executives and the salaried exempts, hourly's are coming in right around three for the averages. But on the left side, you're seeing that, again, if you really take into account the sample sizes, who's doing what, there can be organizations that are moving faster than that 3%.
Rena: So, I think it is indicating that there's still some catch up being played. Organizations are trying to either catch up, or they're trying to differentiate themselves by doing something a little different.

Rena: Now, when we talk about increases, it also differs by industry. So, if you put your eyes to the second column from the right, you'll see finance, banking and insurance. Run your eye up and down that. The three, if you look, the three is everywhere, right? So, the 3% increase is pretty standard. But look at those averages, you're seeing that finance banking and insurance might be trying to get a cut above, growing a little faster than what everyone else is doing.

Rena: Okay, we're going to shift a little bit here, and speaking of increases, we have what kind of guidance was provided to managers when they were asked to give increase recommendations? You can see that the answers are pretty evenly divided, and the three biggest ones are, "Well, our increases are based on employee performance." Okay. They're based on a formal matrix, where you tell me performance, where they are in the range, I get an increased number. Done. Then the third one, that's also at that 25 ish percent, that said managers had their flexibility, they can do the increase they want. However, they have to stay within the budget.

Rena: Now, the across the board method, that would be the second one down, an equal percentage to everyone. And other types of methods are really popular. Sticking with this pay per performance increases and the questions around that, we ask the difference in the increases that organizations are giving to their high, satisfactory and low performance. You can see from the data here on top you're seeing the averages and the bottom graph is showing the median. I like the averages numbers, they're a little bit more differentiation I can see.

Rena: I can see that the lower performers are getting a 1.24% increase, and the high performances are getting a 4.54% increase. So, I'm always talking about this with clients, high performers are proven through various research sources to value differentiation. It's less about the total amount that you're giving them, and more about the fact that they understand that you've taken part of that budget and tried to recognizing them with it.

Rena: So, if you're going to kind of differentiate performance, you need, you know, most of the time you're relying on some form of a performance management program. With this trend of blowing up the way performance management is done out there in the market place, we actually ask our participants in this survey if they still have a formal performance management program. Found out that 18% don't formally assess performance. 29% assess it, but they don't have a rating. Less so have a rating but not mathematically calculate it. And 32% mathematically calculate the rating. That's kind of some interesting fodder there for what we're seeing in those compensation areas.

Rena: Now, when we talk about pay per performance, what we were talking about on those other slides is oftentimes how do you do the base salary increase? But short term incentives comes to mind when we're talking about any sort of performance? Right? And you'll see that certain industries are bigger on those than others. The great majority always have incentives for executives and the management link, but there is a trend to push incentives down through the organization. And that trend is growing [inaudible 00:13:41]. I'll show you again, second to the right, the finance, banking and insurance, you look there and hourly production offers to provide [inaudible 00:13:52] is up in the high 80's to 90. So, that means the incentive is being pushed down through all levels of the organization.

Rena: Middle of the graph there, of that table, construction and real estate, also pretty high with their supervisory jobs and office professional jobs in terms of eligibility to participate in these bonus programs.

Rena: What's being paid out? That has a lot to do with what industry and what job and all that. Our data's showing about, you know, 18% of base pay, all the way down to about 4% of base pay. Now, incentives are most commonly paid out annually, although we do see, and especially with some of this pushing down throughout the organization, quarterly is the next most often performance period for these types of program.

Rena:  We also asked about long term incentive vehicles. And when we're talking executive compensation, long term incentives are another big part of the package. In previous years, as well as this year, the restricted stock programs and performance unit plans in the middle of this table here are the ones that have the most popularity. They have a lot of private organizations in this sample size, so that also contributes. But that is what we have or long term incentives. And with that, I think we're going to do one last poll before I pass it over to Kevin here.

Rena: So, when you think about your organization, and I want to you to think about the last time your cash compensation program, you can talk about base salaries, short term incentive, or long term incentives. When it was reviewed for market competitiveness? You might say fairly recently, you know, "We feel good about it. Yeah, we've been benchmarking gathering data." You say B, within the last three to five year. Maybe getting a bit stale, but okay. Or you might say we just kind of wing it. We pay what we need to, give discretionary bonuses. We just do what we need to do to keep the talent.

Rena: Let me see what you guys are all saying here, I'm so curious. Fairly recently, okay. So, a good portion, 55%, are fairly recently. 19% within the last three to five years. And 26% are saying yeah, we'll wing it, we'll do what we need to do to get the talent. Thank you very much. All right, Kevin, I think you're up.
Kevin: Well thank you Rena, I'm going to spend some time talking about retirement plans, both qualified and non-qualified plans, and talk about our survey results in that area. One of the things that you'll find thought is that generally the results are fairly consistent with last year's results. So, what that means isn't that nothing interesting happened, it's just that we're going to have the same challenges and focus from last year to this year. Companies are going to be focused on the same thing.

Kevin: So, as we look at retirement plan options, the first item that we're going to talk about are what types of plans are companies offering? And the first thing that we'll notice is that we've broken out the data for defined contribution plans in a little more detail than last year. Last year we just had defined contribution plans lumped together, today we are breaking apart those that require an employee contribution, and those that do not require an employee contribution. But combined, they're still at a 97% level, which as you can see just overwhelms any other plan type.

Kevin: So, the real focus is still on defined contribution plans, and probably will stay that way for the foreseeable future. The challenge with this is that we all know that employees are not saving enough for retirement, and during the next few slides we're going to address some of the ways that we can help employees to address that.

Kevin: So, as you look at retirement plan matching on the next slide, we first look at what companies are doing in terms of matching and how it looks by FDE's. But what we see is that in this first planned feature, a matching contribution, 74% of plan sponsors offer a match. And that's really important, that's a great thing to do, because we know that a match is one of the key features that will help drive employee participation. And since employees don't save enough, that's obviously very important.

Kevin: We also know that people tend to contribute up to the point of receiving a full match. That just tends to be how people think. And so those two factors combined provide a couple of opportunities to drive participation. The first is that if your company doesn't have a match, you should really think about having one. Now is a great time to think about having a match if you don't already have one.

Kevin: But the second is that if you have a match, or are thinking about putting in a match, think about the way that you can best drive participation levels. So, for example rather than having a 50 cent match on the first 3% of amount deferred, have a 25 cent match on the first 6% amount deferred. The cost is the same, because it's matching up to 6%, we'll tend to see employees contribute to a higher level.

Kevin: As we go onto the next slide, retirement plan automatic enrollment, that's another key feature that's a second key feature that we see companies use. And as we can see, about 50% of plans have this feature. Again, that's really important, because again, we're trying to drive participation.

Kevin: This feature uses a technique that behavioral finance experts call choice architecture. And an example of this would be if we were to consider something that we see in Europe, Germany and Australia are two countries that have similar locals, similar populations. And yet in Germany, 12% of the population are people that are organ donors, while in Australia. Excuse me, Austria, not Australia, that would be in the wrong part of the world, in Austria 99% of the people are organ donors.

Kevin: And the difference is that in Germany, one has to opt in to become an organ donor, but in Austria, one has to opt out. So, similarly, we can do the same thing with auto enrollment. It uses a choice architecture to drive participation. So, if you aren't using that, that's something that you might want to consider at this point.

Kevin: Going onto the next slide, we have a little bit more on auto enrollment. The question is, what percentage do you tart at? And we see that the best percentage is 3%, although there is quite a range. 6% is second most, and then there's a broad range of other rates that are being used.

Kevin: So, 3% is a very common default. And although there is a broad range, one thing to think about, what are some of the considerations that you might think about when thinking about what's the right rate to start with? And that might be what savings rate the participants need. What's the average savings rate of active participants at various levels? And what's the range of the company match? Because obviously that's something else that you want to take into consideration so that you're fitting the match in and coordinating the match with the enrollment feature.

Kevin: If we go onto the next slide, we talk about a third design feature that's very important, which is automatic escalations. This seems to be up slightly from last year, it's one of the things that has changed a little bit. So, auto escalation does seem to be a little bit more prevalent. And one of the things supporting that is not only do we see that automatic escalation has increased by a few percent, but those companies that don't have it and are considering it for the future have decreased by a similar percent. So, it looks as though some of those that were thinking about it, have actually implemented it over the past year.

Kevin: The feature here is one where it takes participants that are already in the plan, and it just increased their deferral by a set amount, set percentage amount, each year automatically. And that really helps to drive people towards an optimal savings [inaudible 00:22:16[. Because for them to change that, they would have to use the opt out feature again, and back to the architecture, the concept of behavioral architecture driving participation.

Kevin: So, one thing to keep in mind is that we can make it easier for participants to do this. One way to implement this feature effectively would be to coordinate the auto escalation with the timing of compensation increases. So, for example, if you have compensation increases in January each year or April each year, have the auto escalation feature kick in at the same time. And then that way when somebody gets a 2% or 3% raise, they'll see 1% of it go to the 401K and 2% end up in their pay check, so that it's money that's not as easily missed, and therefore just automatically helps them increase their retirement savings.

Kevin: Switching to the next slide, we have a little bit more on automatic escalation. Here we see that by far the overwhelming percentage chosen for auto escalation is 1%. I don't think that that's a surprise to anybody, since we all use that. But let's go on now to the next slide, on evaluating retirement plan services.

Kevin: We see that when companies are evaluating retirement plan services, the number one thing that they're looking at is the level and quality of service, close to a third of companies are evaluating first based on that. The second most important feature is the cost of investment, so roughly 25% are evaluating on that. And then we have reputation of the provider, and cost of service.

Kevin: Now, what we're seeing when we look at those top four is kind of interesting from the perspective that quality and reputation are obviously important, they're in the top four, but it is interesting that the quality and value being derived, the reputation being enjoyed, is as important or more important than the cost features here. So, that seems to be the important factor that companies are looking for in these features.

Kevin: The next slide focuses on financial wellness programs. We continue to see this as an important feature, and we know that financial stress can impact employee wellbeing, and therefore have an impact on absenteeism. We see that 44% of employers have implemented a program and another 21% are planning to do so, which means that roughly two thirds of the employers are seeing this type of feature as something that's important. And it will be interesting to see how this continues to play out over the next few years.

Kevin: So, that wraps up where we are in qualified plans. We now move forward to talk about non qualified plans. When we look at non qualified plans in this survey, roughly a third, a little over a third of the participants have such a plan. But when you look at it in this nice, aggregated sense, it looks like a nice, simple number. But we find out that it's really a much more complicated number, because it varies a lot depending upon the size of the employer.

Kevin: What we find is that today, deferred compensation plans, voluntary deferred compensation plans in particular, are very, very important to large employers. So, if a company is near a billion a year in revenue or up, or their number of employees is in the thousand range or up, they're very, very likely to have a deferred compensation plan. And in fact if we go to the next slide, we see that 87% of employers of a size of 15 or more have these type of plans. That's right in line with some over survey information that we've seen, where if we look at Fortune 1500 companies, we see that 92% have them. Our own survey has tended to look around 90% as well over the last few surveys.

Kevin: So, that's something where when we focus on large employers, that 90% number seems to be solidifying up more and more from various survey information. In addition however, what this chart really shows is that even for mid tier companies, this is becoming more important. When we get down to lower tier companies, those are 100 or fewer, or 100 to 250, we see that we're at the range of about one in five companies tend to have these types of plans. But even when we get more to the mid tier range, we start creeping up, and we creep up fairly rapidly. So, we can see these companies are doing this, and they're doing it from what we hear, and from our experience, for two reasons.

Kevin: One is because they compete more with the larger companies for employees, so they have to have these kind of plans on a more regular basis. But also, because management in these companies sees the direct benefits that they can enjoy with these types of plans, and that's also driving these companies to ensure that they have these types of arrangements.

Kevin: If we go and look at the next slide, we can see what plans look like by type of company. And we see that, well, it bounces around a little bit. It tends to stay not too far away from the 37% average. Manufacturing, utilities, et cetera is right on target. Not for profit I think not surprisingly is a little bit lower. Construction and real estate might first be a surprise, but those industries tend to have a little bit more volatility and business cycle impact, and sometimes that doesn't work well with deferred compensation, or people get concerned about that [inaudible 00:28:16] for deferred compensations.

Kevin: Other services again is right on target. Finance, banking and insurance, we see a higher percentage there. And again, that doesn't surprise us. There tends to be a little bit more comp that's available for their deferred bonus based comps in particular, but also because they tend to understand the plans better, and see the real value in them. And then healthcare is also slightly above average.

Kevin: If we look at the next slide, we're talking about the types of employees that are typically in these plans. Since voluntary non-deferred compensation is the top plan, it shouldn't be surprising to everybody that presidents and CEOs and vice presidents are among those most up frequently in the plans. Top exec plans are going to have that type of personnel in them.

Kevin: The next slide looks at some of the important reasons for these types of plans, and what's important and what's not important. And generally we see things like retention, recruiting, financial planning tools. Those all tend to be very important, along with tech sufficient compensation vehicle. And year after year, those tend to be very important reasons.

Kevin: And then finally, were those two slides flipped on me there? Let's go onto slide 40 ... I think I had my slides flipped there for a second. Okay, so, yeah, let's just go there. I'm sorry about that. Here we see what are companies funding with today? The companies typically use either mutual funds or life insurance. Or they do not set aside assets. Companies that are funding with life insurance tend to be among those that are larger. The larger the company, the more that they tend to use life insurance. They tend to understand the tax advantages of life insurance, and that the extra cost of life insurance is out weighed by the taxes that would be paid on mutual funds.

Kevin: When you tend to get down to smaller level companies, they sometimes prefer the simplicity of mutual funds, but what they see is the perceived simplicity and easier ability to work with mutual funds, because they're more familiar with mutual funds, rather than the larger [inaudible 00:30:27] plans that we see in large companies.

Kevin: So, with that, I'll toss it back to you, Rani.

Rena: All right, thank you, Kevin. I'm going to take us through the last part of our trends data, and that's on health and welfare benefits. So, first off, we asked what type of health insurance options were offered. We did find that the most offered plans were PPO's and HDHP's, so high deductible health plans. 28% are still offering HMO's. And there's definitely a difference with as you get bigger and bigger as an organization, there's definitely a balance of offering both, right? That is a trend we've been noticing, and that has just steadily crept up there.

Rena: We then asked, well, what are people choosing? And overall, PPO's are the most popular option selected amongst employees, 55% are choosing them. We do see those high deductible plans, they've been steadily growing, close to 30% of employees are selecting those. We ask, when we kicked off the presentation, recall that poll was about what was most concerning in terms of cost, and 84% thought increase in health plan costs in 2018. In your poll amongst participants here, that was by far the overwhelming concern in terms of cost.

Rena: So, tie that right back there. You can see from this data that the largest percentage of employers reported that they were seeing increases in the 4-8%, but anywhere between that zero to 12 has the majority of folks answering in there. And cost management, we're going to see, but encouraging employees to spend wisely through health savings accounts. Having employers work to manage these surging specialty pharmacy costs. These are all things that are kind of in this health insurance control, and costs are shifting, so we've got more with the workers paying more of the rising healthcare costs. There are all these things that we've been seeing.

Rena: The average monthly premiums for families came in at $1,382, with $522 for an employee only. Obviously those numbers go down as you're a large organization. The employees share premium ranges here from in our sample from 19%, employee only, to 32% at the family level.

Rena: Now, we just talked about the fact that yeah, we asked our participants here what are you going to do exactly to control these healthcare costs? And 55% I think are throwing their hands up and saying [inaudible 00:33:37], that's very evil. However, 30% saying we're going to raise that employee portion of the premium payment. We're going to raise employee deductibles. Or, as Kevin talked about financial wellness, different kinds of wellness programs. Implement a health well program here.

Rena: We do see other types of ideas. The consumer driven healthcare options, and the dependent audits. They haven't been moving too fast, but they're there and making a showing. Now, we asked ... we typically ask this question, what benefits do you offer? And we've been saying that the big benefits are offering the health and welfare, the life. But there's some unique benefits out there. One interesting note that I have on this slide, that the long term care insurance and retirement medical, those were higher last year. So, those might be sort, I think they were sort of fad benefits. Or they're becoming too costly as in the case of retiring medical. And they're tending to be shifting off of those offered benefits.

Rena: Now, we are always kind of looking to add to this. There's a lot of different benefits that are up and coming. We're going to put more on the list as we go. So, if you have good ideas about that, make sure ... we've got a little survey coming at the very end, and you should feel free to tell us what else we can add to this list that might be unique and interesting, and you're curious about whether or not you should do it. But that'll really take us to the end. And if I could just keep you for a minute or two longer, I wanted to remind you that in the control panel, you can download the presentation. You can get a nice case study that talks about how an organization dealt with executive compensation studies. There's a quiz to see how you're doing.

Rena: You're going to get an email after the webinar that will have links to the replay. So, if you wanted to hear anything again. And then on the screen here is our contact information. And as I mentioned before, if you're interested in knowing anything, I can slice and dice this data further and get you information. You can download the executive summary where everything is all there, all the charts. But I can go behind the data and get you information for your industry, your size.

Rena:  So, with that, as you exit the webinar, you will see frequent questions. Please answer them, let us know what's of interest to you. And I will just check the questions page one second. I see we have two quick questions. One question was ... I'm going to do this for Kevin, what's the minimum size a company needs to be to have a non qualified in your experience?

Kevin: There's really no set minimum size. What we find is that obviously the larger the company, the more sense it makes in a number of ways, because the plan cost can typically be spread over a larger number of executives. There's larger amounts to be deferred, so plan costs can be spread over large dollars and things like that. However, in terms of number of participants, when a company starts getting small enough that they start getting to 10 or fewer, then the questions tend to get a little bit bigger in terms of is the cost worth it? Should we be doing something more simple internally? Things like that.

Kevin: So, it's going to vary on a company to company basis, but if you're a company and you have at least 10 people who could be in such a plan, you're in great shape. If you've got at least five to ten, then it might be very viable. And if you're getting below five, then you've got some tough questions whether or not you want to outsource it, or do you want to just find something that you could do internally? Or whether it's something that you can make look very much like your 401K, or [inaudible 00:37:48] in a very standardized type of format so that it can be outsourced simply and cost effectively. And those are all features that you can work with your provider to determine.

Rena: All right, so five to ten or more in the plan. Great.

Kevin: Right.

Rena: We've got another question here, what types of benchmarking resources does Newport have or make available? Well, this one kind of benchmarking. Kevin, you've got a non-qualified deferred comp survey that you do every couple of years.

Kevin: Right.

Rena: We've also ... the comp group is actually all about benchmarking. So, our team is constantly, we maintain a salary survey library of all of the top published survey data. So, we can tell you for a small company in Nebraska, in Omaha, Nebraska, 800 people, $500 million in revenue in steel manufacturing, what the CFO should make. So, we kind of go in there and we're putting the power of that benchmarking. We do that for executives, all the way down to the entry level positions in an organization. Use that benchmarking information in the philosophy discussions to set up the paid program and the structures and so on.

Rena: So, we do a lot of benchmarking, and on the 401K side we can benchmark those programs as well. So, a lot of benchmarking here at Newport Group. If you're interested, you have our contact information there. The website will direct you right to where you can get that, and ask your questions there.

Rena: There's one last question here, can you tell me more information about the insurance rates lifted? Yes, those were ... I'm going to go back up real quick. She's asking I think about these premiums. Those are really all grouped right now, so again, we've sliced and diced these [inaudible 00:39:51]. So, it's got this is all locations, but then broken out by FTE. So, feel free to reach out and I can see if I can break it down any more.

Rena: So, with that, I see I've answered the questions in the question pane, and I really appreciate everybody's time today. It's been wonderful to spend a little bit of time in the afternoon with you, and we look forward to crossing paths again. Thank you for attending, have a great afternoon.

Unauthorized access is prohibited. This site is designed for U.S. residents only.
Newport Group, Inc. and its affiliates provide recordkeeping, plan administration, trust and custody, consulting, fiduciary consulting, insurance and brokerage services. Fiduciary consulting services are provided through Newport Group Securities, Inc., an SEC-registered investment adviser and FINRA-registered broker-dealer, and InterServ, LLC, an SEC-registered investment adviser. Newport Group Securities, Inc. and InterServ, LLC are affiliates of Newport Group, Inc. All securities transactions are provided through Newport Group Securities, Inc., in its role as broker-dealer. All fiduciary consulting services are provided through the registered investment adviser. when offering variable insurance products, Newport Group Securities, Inc. acts solely in its capacity as a broker-dealer.
Trust and custody services provided by Newport Trust Company, a New Hampshire state chartered trust company and wholly owned subsidiary of Newport Group, Inc.