Install
$ agentstack add skill-latestaiagents-agent-skills-compensation-analysis ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Compensation Analysis
Build fair, competitive compensation structures.
When to Use
- Benchmarking salaries against market
- Creating or updating salary bands
- Analyzing pay equity
- Planning compensation reviews
- Building total rewards packages
Compensation Structure
Salary Band Framework
## Band Structure
| Level | Title Examples | Band Width | Typical Range |
|-------|---------------|------------|---------------|
| L1 | Associate, Junior | 20% | Entry level |
| L2 | Mid-level, Specialist | 25% | 2-4 years exp |
| L3 | Senior, Lead | 30% | 5-8 years exp |
| L4 | Staff, Principal | 35% | 8-12 years exp |
| L5 | Director, Senior Staff | 40% | 12+ years exp |
## Band Positioning
| Position | % of Midpoint | When to Use |
|----------|--------------|-------------|
| Below Min | 5% below expected pay
- >10% above expected pay
- Unexplained by legitimate factors
Pay Gap Metrics
## Raw Pay Gap
(Avg Male Salary - Avg Female Salary) / Avg Male Salary × 100
## Adjusted Pay Gap
Difference after controlling for:
- Job level
- Department
- Location
- Experience
- Performance
## Compa-Ratio
Individual Salary / Band Midpoint × 100
Target: 90-110%
Total Compensation Components
## Base Salary
- Fixed annual pay
- Typically 60-80% of total comp
## Variable Pay
### Bonus
- Target %: [X]% of base
- Performance multiplier: 0-200%
- Payout timing: Annual/Quarterly
### Commission (Sales)
- On-target earnings (OTE)
- Split: [X]% base / [X]% variable
- Accelerators above quota
## Equity
### Stock Options
- Grant value at hire
- Vesting: Typically 4 years, 1-year cliff
- Refresh grants
### RSUs
- Restricted Stock Units
- Same vesting as options
- Value = shares × stock price
## Benefits Value
- Health insurance: $[X]/year
- 401(k) match: [X]% up to $[X]
- Other benefits: $[X]/year
## Total Rewards Statement
Base Salary: $XXX,XXX
Target Bonus: $XX,XXX
Equity (annual): $XX,XXX
Benefits: $XX,XXX
Total Compensation: $XXX,XXX
Compensation Review Process
## Annual Review Cycle
### Timeline
| Month | Activity |
|-------|----------|
| Q3 | Budget planning, market data refresh |
| Q4 | Manager recommendations |
| Jan | Calibration sessions |
| Feb | Final approvals |
| Mar | Communication to employees |
| Apr | New compensation effective |
### Manager Worksheet
For each employee, consider:
1. Current compa-ratio
2. Performance rating
3. Time since last increase
4. Retention risk
5. Market movement
6. Budget constraints
### Calibration Questions
- Are increases proportional to performance?
- Are there pay equity concerns?
- Are high performers above midpoint?
- Are retention risks addressed?
Geographic Pay Differentials
## Location-Based Adjustments
| Tier | Example Locations | % of Base |
|------|-------------------|-----------|
| Tier 1 | SF, NYC, Seattle | 100% |
| Tier 2 | LA, Boston, Denver | 90-95% |
| Tier 3 | Austin, Chicago, Atlanta | 85-90% |
| Tier 4 | Other metro areas | 80-85% |
| Tier 5 | Rural / low COL | 75-80% |
## Relocation Considerations
- Moving to higher tier: May increase
- Moving to lower tier: Typically maintain (grandfathered)
- New hires: Paid at location rate
Best Practices
- Update market data annually - Compensation moves fast
- Be transparent - Share bands and philosophy with employees
- Regular equity audits - At least annually
- Document decisions - Maintain records for all pay decisions
- Train managers - They need to understand and communicate comp
- Consider total rewards - Base salary isn't everything
- Budget realistically - Plan for merit, promotions, and equity fixes
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: latestaiagents
- Source: latestaiagents/agent-skills
- License: MIT
- Homepage: https://latestaiagents.com
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.