—ENDNOTES—

"See, for example, the National Commission of the Public Service, Lead-
ership for America: Rebuilding the Public Service, Washington, DC, 1989.

The President’s Pay Agent consists of the Secretary of Labor, the Direc-
tor of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management.

> Locality pay surveys covered State and local government establishments
while SCA surveys did not.

* The scope of locality pay surveys covered 65 percent of all civilian
workers, based on U1 Insurance recoids.

* As of this printing, BLS published national summaries for 1992, 1993,
1994, and 1995 OCS data. A national summary for 1996 is forthcoming.

© Based on straight-time average weekly or hourly pay, depending on
‘occupation. weekly pay for white-collar workers relates to regu-
lar mean straight-time salaries that are paid for standard work weeks.

7 For a complete collection of job descriptions by occupation and level,
see Manual of OCSP Job Descriptions, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wash-
ington, DC, January 1995.

* A reason for this is that the metropolitan sample was 85 percent of the
total employment.
° Occupational Compensation Survey Natiorial Summary, 1995, Bu-
reau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2487, May 1997.

‘© “Rest of United States” consists of all metropolitan areas and non-met-
ropolitan counties not designated by the Pay Agent for locality based rates.

Alaska and Hawaii are not part of “Rest of United States” or locality pay.

" Buckley, John E., “Pay in Private Industry and State and Local Gov-
ernments,” Compensation Working Conditions, September 1996, pp.
22-26; and Miller, Michael A. “State and Local Government Workers: Are

‘They Overpaid?,” Monthly Labor Review, May 1996, pp. 18-29.

" VanGiezen, Robert W., “Occupational Wages in the Fast-food Restau-
rant Industry,” Monthly Labor Review, August 1994, pp. 24-30.

» Dietz, Elizabeth, “Wages in the Deep Sea Transportation Industry:
Freighters and Tankers,” Compensation and Working Conditions, Summer
1997, pp. 66-71.

TM Dietz, Elizabeth, “Wages in Forestry and Logging,” Compensation
and Working Conditions, Spring 1997, pp. 51-54.

‘8 VanGiezen, Robert W., “Occupational Wages and Employee Benefits
Among Small Certificated Air Carriers in Alaska,” Compensation and Work-
ing Conditions, December 1996, pp. 37-39.

4 Miller, Michael A., “Nursing Pay in Private Industry, 1994,” Com-
pensation and Working Conditions, Spring 1997, pp. 11-22.

"" Dietz, Elizabeth, “A Look at Temporary Help Wage Rates,” Compen-
sation and Working Conditions, September 1996, pp. 46-50.

Based on 1994 BLS intemal records of requests for OCS data.

‘* See, for example, Hoffmann, Kenneth, “New Approach to Measuring
recuennry Wages,” Compensation and Working Conditions, December
1996, pp. 4-8.

Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997 44


surveyed, and they were highly industry-specific.

For the 1991 and 1992 OCS locality pay survey rounds,

41 occupations were surveyed. The list remained the same
for the 1993 surveys, but in 1994, registered nurse (includ-
ing specialists and anesthetists), licensed practical nurse,
and nursing assistant were added. These new occupations
had originally appeared in the WCP surveys but due to bud-
get restrictions were dropped from the 1991-93 rounds. In
1995, OCS added director of personnel to the job list, an-
other job resurrected from the WCP survey. OCS also added
two newly defined jobs, scientist and skilled multi-craft
maintenance worker. Meanwhile, OCS dropped budget
analyst supervisor and reorganized some of its material
movement and storage occupations. By the 1995 round of
surveys and continuing through the end of OCS locality
pay surveys in 1997, the job list had grown to 45 occupa-
tions. .
In contrast, most of the SCA surveys were based on a
smaller list, 27 occupations, using the same job descrip-
tions as those used in the locality pay surveys. The SCA
surveys, which were targeted for special industries, for ex-
ample the fast food industry, had special lists specific to
each of the industries surveyed. (See appendix 2 for local-
ity pay and SCA job lists.)

Industries covered. OCS expanded upon the private indus-
try coverage of white-collar pay and area wage surveys, to
include State and local government establishments. This
made possible the publication of salaries of government
workers and their comparisons with private industry work-
ers!

Over the course of the OCS survey years, several special
SCA and locality pay industry studies were conducted in
addition to the regular surveys. From 1990-93, two SCA
surveys were conducted for the fast food industry."? Eating
and drinking establishments had been surveyed for about
15 years by BLS, and under OCS, a special SCA survey of
this industry was conducted in 1993. Both the fast food
and the eating and drinking establishments surveys used
job lists unique to their respective industries.

SCA surveys had been conducted since the mid-1980s
for the national deep sea transportation industry and for
several States in the forestry and logging industries. Under
OCS, these SCA surveys continued to be produced for ESA.
Deep sea freighters were surveyed in 1991, 1993, and 1996,
and deep sea tankers were surveyed in 1991 and 1993 un-
der OCS." In 1993 and 1994, forestry and logging surveys
were conducted in Oregon, Washington, Montana, Idaho,
Arkansas, and Mississippi.'* In 1994, OCS also conducted

43 Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997

aspecial SCA survey of certificated air carriers in Alaska.'®
Each of these surveys contained a job list unique to the
industry surveyed.

OCS conducted two special locality pay series in response
to current trends in the labor market. With the aging popu-
lation and increased costs of medical care, many data users
began looking for industry wage data on the health services
industry. In response to this need, OCS increased its sample
of health services establishments for locality pay surveys in
1994. The full locality pay job list, which as of 1994 in-
cluded registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and nurs-
ing assistants, was surveyed in these health services estab-
lishments. This made possible the publication of wages for
over 40 occupations across all industries, and wages for
these same occupations specific to the health services in-
dustry.'* Locality bulletins and summaries included the
usual data on average wages for all industries and addi-
tional data on average wages of the same job list specific to
the health services industry. The 1994 national bulletin
summarized the survey findings on health service industry
wages for the Nation as a whole.

Another rapidly emerging issue in the labor market was
the increasing use of temporary help workers in an ever-
widening array of occupations. More and more data users
were looking for wage information on all types of workers
in the temporary help services industry. OCS responded
with a nationwide survey in 1994. National and regional
estimates were published in addition to summaries for 21
metropolitan areas. Average wages for several white-col-
lar, blue-collar, and service occupations common to the tem-
porary help services industry were collected.'”

Looking to the future

Change was the hallmark of the Occupational Compen-
sation Survey program throughout its life. There were
changes in the areas and occupations surveyed, and there
were occasional additions of special studies. OCS produced
over 700 publications of timely locality wage data as well
as annual summaries of its national and locality data. OCS
fulfilled its original purpose of providing data for Federal
pay on a locality basis, but the data produced by this pro-
gram also filled some 3,000 data requests per year." From
this point forward, the new National Compensation Sur-
veys (NCS), which started in mid-1997, will supplant OCS.
NCS is designed to fulfill the requirements of FEPCA
and improve upon the OCS design." If the OCS expe-
tience is any indication of the future, NCS will, without
doubt, face many changes and challenges over the course
of its life.


Appendix 1. Published SCA and Locality Pay Surveys Conducted Under the Occupational

Compensation Survey Program

Abilene, TX

Albany, GA
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY
Albuquerque, NM
Alexandria-Leesville, LA
Alpena-Standish-Tawas City, MI
Anaheim-Santa Ana, CA
Anchorage, AK

Ann Arbor, MI

Apache, AZ

Appleton-Green Bay, WI
Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah, Wi
Asheville, NC

Atlanta, GA

Atiantic City, NJ

Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN
Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN CMSA
Garkevile Hopkinevile, TN-KY

Cleveland, OH
Cleveland-Akron, OH CMSA
Colorado Springs, CO
Columbia-Sumter, SC
Columbus, GA-AL
Columbus, MS

Columbus, OH
Connecticut Statewide

Corpus Christi, TX

Cumberland, MD-WV

Dallas, TX

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CMSA

Danbury, CT

Davenport-Rock Isiand-Moline, [A-IL
OH

Dayton-Springfield,

Daytona Beach, FL

Decatur County, GA

Decatur, IL

Delaware County, NY

Denver, CO
Denver-Boulder-Greely, CO CMSA
Des Moines, 1A

Detroit, MI

Dodge County, NE

Dothan, AL

Duluth, MN-Wi

Dyer County, TN

Eau Claire-La Crosse, WI-MN

Et Paso-Las Cruces-Alamogordo, TX-NM
Elkhart-Goshen, IN

Elmira, NY

Eugene-Springfield, OR

Evansville-Clarksville, IN-KY-TN:
ie, NC

Finney, KS

Florence,

Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood, FL

Gadsden-Anniston, AL

Gainesville, FL

Gallia, OH

Gary-Hammond, IN

Goldsboro, NC

Grand Istand-Hastings, NE

Green Bay, WI
Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point,

ie, FL
dacksonville-New Bern, NC
Joliet, IL
Juneau County, WI
Kalamazoo-Battle Creek, MI

Lawrence-Haverhill, |MA-NH
KY
Lima, OH

45 Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997

Lincoin County, WY

Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR
Livingston, IL

Logansport-Peru, IN
Longview-Marshall, TX
Lorain-Elyria, OH .
‘Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA
Louisville, KY-IN

Lower Eastern Shore, MD-VA-DE
Macon-Wamer Robins, GA
Madison, WI

Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL
Memphis, TN-AR-MS
Mercer: County OH

Meridian, MS

Miami-Ft. Lauderdale, FL CMSA
Miami-Hialeah, FL
Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon, NJ
Milwaukee, WI
Milwaukee-Racine, WI CMSA
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI
Mobile, AL

Monmouth-Ocean, NJ

Monroe County, FL

Montana Statewide

New Britain, CT

New Hampshire Statewide

New London-Norwich, CT

New Orleans, LA

New York, NY

Newark, NJ

Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA
North Dakota Statewide

Northeastern lowa

Northeastem Tennessee-West Virginia
Northern Lower Peninsula, Ml
Northern New York

Northwest Florida

NorthwestTexas

Oxford County, ME

Oxnard-Ventura, CA

Panola County, TX
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH
Pawtucket-Woonsocket-Attleboro, RI-MA
Peoria, IL

Philadelphia, PA-NJ
Philadelphia: Witmington-Atiantic City, PA-
NJ-DE-MD CMSA’

Phoenix, AZ

Pine Bluff, AR

Pittsburgh, PA

Pittsburg County, OK

Polk County, TX

Portland, ME

Portland, OR

Portland- Salem, OR-WA CMSA


Occupational Compensation

The Occupational
Compensation
Surveys:

A Retrospective

BY JOHN BUCKLEY AND ELIZABETH DIETZ

In July 1997, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) con-
cluded 6 years of locality pay and Service Contract Act sur-
veys collected under the umbrella of the Occupational Com-
pensation Survey (OCS) program. The OCS program has
been discontinued as the first step in phasing in the new
National Compensation Survey program. During these 6
years, the Bureau of Labor Statistics refined its methods for
collecting occupational wage data on a local level, and com-
piling them into regional and national estimates. It also
developed means of quickly adapting to the needs of major
data users, and providing them with rich, high quality, timely
data. Now at the close of the OCS program, it is time to
review its accomplishments.

Legislative underpinnings

In the middle and late 1980s, Federal agencies were hav-
ing increasing difficulty recruiting and retaining high-cali-
ber employees in certain localities. Most Federal white-
collar workers were paid according to a national pay scale,
the so-called “General Schedule.” And because some local
labor markets were paying wages higher than the national
average for certain occupations, General Schedule wages
were falling short of the wages sought by qualified employ-
ees. After several attempts at partial solutions and much
discussion among Congress and other parties, it became
evident that the Federal Govermnent needed a pay system
that was more flexible and responsive to local labor markets.’

John Buckley and Elizabeth Dietz are economists inthe Division of Com-
pensation Data Analysis and Planning, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Telephone
(202) 606-6287.

In November 1990, Congress passed the Federal Em-
ployees Pay Comparability Act (FEPCA) as a means of ef-
fecting the needed changes. A primary feature of the act
was the creation of a locality-based pay system to replace
the single General Schedule that largely disregarded local-
ity pay differences found in the private sector. The
President’s Pay Agent’ was given primary responsibility
for administering FEPCA. FEPCA named the Bureau of
Labor Statistics as the agency to conduct surveys for use in
determining locality pay levels.

Development of the OCS design

The Bureau created the OCS program to fulfill its part
in implementing FEPCA. When FEPCA was signed into
law, BLS was concurrently collecting data under its Area
Wage Survey (AWS) program, the White-collar Pay Survey
(WCP) program, the Industry Wage Survey (IWS) program,
and surveys for the Service Contract Act (SCA) under con-
tract with the Employment Standards Administration
(ESA). Area wage surveys provided wage data on a list of
blue-collar and mostly clerical white-collar occupations in
90 metropolitan statistical areas; industry wage surveys pro-
vided industry-specific data on most of the occupations
found in each industry surveyed; and national data on spe-
cific white-collar occupations were provided by the White-
collar Pay Survey. These existing occupational wage sur-
veys fulfilled the needs of data users as well as a variety of
legislative requirements.

At the inception of the OCS program, BLS was facing
tight budget restrictions. Given these conditions, the Bu-
reau developed three major goals: Provide data required by

Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997 40


Appendix 1. Published SCA and Locality Pay Surveys Conducted Under the Occupational
Compensation Survey Program—Continued

Rio Grande Valley, TX
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA
Rochester, NY

Sacramento,

», CA
Sacramento-Yolo, CA CMSA
Saginaw-Bay City-Midland, MI
St.Louis, MO-IL
St. Cloud, MN:

Salem, OR
Salinas-Seaside-Monterey, CA
Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT

San Angelo, TX

San Antonio, TX

San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
‘San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, cA

CMSA
San Juan, PR CMSA

San Juan County, NM

‘San Jose, CA

San Luis Obispo County, CA
‘Sandusky, OH

Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc, CA
‘Savannah, GA

Scioto County, OH

Scotts Bluff County, NE
Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA

Seattle, WA
Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA CMSA
Selma, AL

Shreveport, LA

‘South Bend-Mishawaka, IN

‘South Dakota Statewide

‘Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
Toledo, OH

Topeka, KS.

Vermilion County, IL
Vermont Statewide

Virgin Islands

Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA.

Waco-Killeen-Temple, TX

Ward County, ND

Washington, DC-MD-VA

Waterloo, |A

West Palm Beach, FL

West Virginia Statewide

Western Massachusetts

Wichita, KS

Wichita Falls-Lawton-Altus, TX-OK

Wilmington, DE-NJ-MD

Worcester, MA

‘Wyoming Statewide

Yakima-Richiand—Kennewick-Pasco-Walla
Walla-Pendleton, WA-OR

York, PA

Appendix 2. Occupational Compensation Survey Program Occupational List

Professional and administrative

Attorneys (six levels)
‘Budget analysts (four levels)
Budget analyst supervisors (two levels)"
Buyers/contracting specialists (five levels)
‘Computer programmers (five levels)?
‘Computer systems analysts (five levels)?
Computer systems analyst supervi -
ers (four levels)

Engineers (eight levels)
Personnel specialists (six levels)
Personnel supervisors/managers (five

levels)

)
Registered raed (four levels, plus

Scientists (eight levels)"
‘Tax collectors (three levels)

Technical
‘Computer operators (five levels}?
Drafters (four levels)?

Engineering technicians (six levels)?

Engineering technicians, civil or survey
technicians/construction inspectors (six
levels)

Licensed practical nurses?

Nursing assistants*

Clerical

Clerks, accounting (four levels?

Clerks, general (four fevels?”

Clerks, order (two levels?

Key entry operators (two levels)?

Personnel assistants (employment) (four
levels)

Secretaries (five levels)?”
Switchboard operator-receptionists?
Word processors (three levels)?

Protective service

Corrections officers

Firefighters.

Police officers, uniformed (two levels)

Maintenance and toolroom

General maintenance workers?

Maintenance electricians*

Maintenance electronics technicians (three
levels)?

Maintenance machinists?

Maintenance mechanics, machinery?

Maintenance mechanics, motor vehicle”

Maintenance pipefitters?

Skilled multi-craft maintenance
worker!?

Tool and die makers?

Material movement and custodial

Forklift operators?

Guards (two levels)?

Janitors?

Material handling taborers*

Order fillers

Shipping/receiving clerks

Truckdrivers (four categories of
trucks?

Warehouse specialists

‘Occupation added in 1995.

surveyed for Service Contract Act surveys.

2 Occupation
Occupation added in 1994 round of surveys.

Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997 46


FEPCA; continue to provide as much of the traditional data
as possible; and streamline and cut back on the overall costs
of collecting occupational wage data.

Rather than duplicate the work of the existing surveys,
it became apparent that the way to fulfill FEPCA require-
ments and produce much of the data that had been tradi-
tionally provided was to retain many features of the exist-
ing programs and merge them into one larger, improved
survey program. After consultations with industry and la-
bor groups and reviewing its resources, BLS created a hy-
brid design for the OCS, implementing features from the
existing AWS and the WCP surveys and dropping some
features from the IWS. SCA surveys were continued under
contract with the Employment Standards Administration.
Collection of OCS data started in 1991 and the first publi-
cations were issued in 1992.

Accomplishments

In addition to providing the Pay Agent with data neces-
sary to produce locality-based pay schedules, OCS data have
been used by private industry groups and State and local
governments for such varied purposes as wage and salary
administration, selection of locations for new plants or fa-
cilities, labor-management negotiations, mediation, evalu-
ation of the suitability of job offers related to unemploy-
ment compensation, formulation of public policy on
minimum wage legislation, academic research, and devel-
opment of wage determinations under the Service Contract
Act.

The OCS program introduced several improvements in
scope, which greatly benefited data users. It:

* Added State and local government establishments* ;
© Added administrative and public safety jobs;

* Expanded the number of professional and technical
jobs covered by the survey;

* Increased the representation of the civilian labor force* ;
and

* Increased the number of localities surveyed.

The OCS program has been publishing data since 1991.
Each of the 298 SCA surveys conducted under OCS from
1991 through 1997 yielded a published summary of results.
During the same period, 405 locality pay bulletins were
published.

The results of most locality pay surveys were published
in locality bulletins. Some locality pay survey data, how-
ever, were collected only for compilation of national and
regional estimates in a national summary. These national
summaries were published annually, at the end of each sur-
vey round.>

41. Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997

The national summaries included data on mean occupa-
tional wages® for the United States (excluding Alaska and
Hawaii), metropolitan areas, non-metropolitan areas, geo-
graphic regions, goods-producing industries, service-pro-
ducing industries, and various establishment sizes. (See
tables 1 and 2 for examples.) Data also included median
wages, interquartile ranges, horizontal distribution of pay,
average standard weekly hours per week worked, and num-
ber of workers by occupation. Many of the occupations were
surveyed by level of expertise and responsibility.” Addi-
tionally, pay relatives, or an index of occupational wage
rates by locality as a proportion of the national average,
were included in the national publications. All annual na-
tional and regional data were based on about 160 locality
surveys. SCA survey data were included only in the local-
ity portions of the national publication.

As an example of the kinds of information provided by
tables 1 and 2, note that:

* Some of the blue-collar occupations earned more in
the Northeast than in the Nation as a whole;

© Soine blue-collar occupations were paid less in smaller
establishments than in all establishments as a whole;

* Many of the average wages in metropolitan areas were
about the same as those for the Nation as a whole*;

* Computer systems analysts earned about the same re-
gardless of location or size of establishment;

* Police officers level 1 earned a large premium work-
ing in the Northeast, and they earned much less, on
average, working in smaller establishments;

* Secretaries level 3 earned more working in the North-
east than they did in the Nation as a whole;

* Engineers level 4 earned roughly the same in the
Northeast as they did in other regions of the country;
earnings in smaller establishments were close to those
in all establishments as a whole; and

© Accountants level 3 averaged about the same in the
Northeast as in the Nation as a whole.

This is only a small sample of the types of comparisons and
contrasts presented in the OCS national summaries®.

Change is the constant factor

Throughout the 6-year course of its surveys, OCS was in
a state of flux. The areas, occupations, and industries
changed over time.. The following sections describe the
design and contents of the emergent OCS and how it
changed over time.


Table 1, Average weekly wage rates for selected cceepetions end here

United States, Metropofitan Establishments
Occupation all establish- Northeast areas with fewer than
ments 500 workers
Accountants, level 3 $797 $795 $801 $789
Engineers, level 1,149 4,134, 1,152 1,148
Computer systems 926 929 928 923,
Police officers, level 1 688 775 713 598
Secretaries, level 3 547 570 550 548
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, ~
‘Occupational tion Survey; National Summary, 1995, Bulle-
tin 2487, May, 1997
Table 2. Average hourly wage rates for selected occupations and characteristics, 1995
United States, Establishments
Occupation allestablish- | Northeast | Metropolitan | with fewer than
ments areas 500 workers

General maintenance workers $10.31 $12.43 $10.69 $9.63
Janitors... 7.83 9.69 793 6.82
Guards, 7.01 767 6.95 631
Guards, level 2 .. 11.86 13.35 11.79 11.30
‘Tractor-trailer truckdrivers .. 14.07 15.68 1458 13.17

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Occupational Survey, National Summary, 1995, Bulle-
tin 2487, May, 1997

Areas sampled. Area wage surveys produced estimates for
all metropolitan areas combined and for four regions—
Northeast, South, Midwest, and West. The Area Wage Sur-
vey sample of metropolitan areas was used as the basis for
the new OCS area sample design because of the emphasis
on locality comparability under FEPCA.

“Critical” metropolitan areas, those required for FEPCA,
were to be surveyed each year. “Non-critical” metropolitan
areas were scheduled to be surveyed every other year, with
two separate groups of non-critical areas being rotated year
by year. Of the 90 metropolitan areas traditionally sur-
veyed under the Area Wage Survey program, 32 were
deemed critical. The remaining 58 were divided into two
groups of 29 areas, each of which would be surveyed bien-
nially on a rotating schedule.

OCS also collected data from 70 non-metropolitan areas
to produce wage estimates representing the non-metropoli-
tan portion of the country. These non-metropolitan data
were combined with data from non-critical metropolitan
areas to represent the “Rest of United States.” '° To assure
the statistical quality of the Rest of United States data, a
dozen additional metropolitan area surveys were conducted.
These data provided the President’s Pay Agent with a means
of comparing pay of Federal and non-Federal workers in
localities that were not separately surveyed. By combining
all metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas, BLS was able

to produce national and regional estimates of wage rates.

Over time, the Pay Agent’s list of critical survey areas
changed, as some metropolitan areas were dropped and oth-
ers added. Some areas were combined with others, which
also affected the total number of areas surveyed. Appendix
1 shows a list of all areas surveyed at least once and whose
results were published under OCS.

In December 1992, the Office of Management and Bud-
get issued revised definitions for the Nation’s metropolitan
areas based on the 1990 Decennial Census. To reflect the
changes, BLS selected a new sample of areas for the 1995
round of surveys to replace the AWS-based/model. This
new area sample design was used from 1995 through the
end of the OCS locality pay surveys, and was adapted for
use in the new National Compensation Survey program.

Occupations surveyed. OCS merged the AWS’s blue-col-
Jar job list and the WCP’s job list to create a combined list
covering professional, administrative, technical, clerical,
protective service, maintenance and toolroom, and mate-
rial movement and custodial occupations. These job de-
scriptions were adopted with little revision to the wording,
because both of these older surveys contained job descrip-
tions that were not industry specific, but rather applied to
jobs found across industries. The job lists for the TWS’s
could not be used because they changed with each industry

Compensation and Working Conditions Fall 1997 42