TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract …………………………………………………………………………… ii

Vita Auctoris …………………...…………………………………………………… iii

Acknowledgments ………………………………………………………………….. iv

List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………….. v

List of Appendices …………………………………………………………………. vi

Chapter One: Introduction ………………………………………………………… 1

Chapter Two: Review of Related Literature ……………………………………… 8

Chapter Three: Methodology …………………………………………………….. 25

Chapter Four: Results …………………………………………………………….. 31

Chapter Five: Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………... 45

References ………………………………………………………………………… 51

Appendices ………………………………………………………………………… 53

ABSTRACT

Employers are required by a multitude of state and federal regulations and legislation to provide certain benefits for their employees: social security, worker’s compensation, unemployment insurance, and family and medical leave. Employers may chose to provide additional discretionary benefits for their employees, such as medical, dental, vision, or pension plans, tuition or relocation reimbursement, as well as paid time off. Do employers choose to provide these additional employee benefits to be competitive with other similarly sized companies in their type of industry or to recruit and retain employees? Do they chose to provide benefits based on the size of their company or the type of industry?

To determine a correlation between discretionary benefits, size of company and type of industry, a survey of 508 companies in the greater Bay Area was conducted. The companies were representative of various industry types and company sizes.

The responses were analyzed and it was determined that, in this geographic location, type of industry and size of company are not statistically significant variables when employers choose the benefits they offer their employees.

VITA AUCTORIS

Name: IrisAnn Nelson

Date of Birth: April 26, 1949

High School: Three Forks High School

Three Forks, Montana

Graduated: 1967

Baccalaureate Degree: Bachelor of Science Degree

Organizational Behavior

College: University of San Francisco

San Francisco, California

Graduated: 1994

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis is dedicated to Andy Frazer for his unfailing support, love, honesty, and encouragement. He graciously went ice skating when the study group met at our home, proofread my papers, listened while I moaned about statistics, and took me out for margaritas or hot-and-sour soup when I was stressed. He truly loves me for who I am, regardless. The feeling is mutual.

This thesis is also dedicated to my children, Eric Burton and Heather Burton Pelzner, who will always be the greatest source of love, joy and pride in my life. They remain my greatest accomplishment and I love them dearly. They are the kind of wonderful people we should all strive to be. I also dedicate this thesis to my son-in-law, Mark Pelzner, and daughter-in-law, Crystal Webb Burton. They are as precious to me as Eric and Heather, and bring love and brightness into all our lives.

I want to acknowledge the encouragement (and persistence!) provided by Sarai Stevenson Rodgers and Margot Monroe. They are two very remarkable women whose friendship I will always treasure. Without their resourceful minds, laughter, and genuine caring, this process would have been much more strenuous.

Thanks are also in order for Robin Pratt and Pete Thoms, whose guidance I value. Pete gave me a sense of belief in myself that made it easier to write my thesis. Robin, well, except for his love of statistics, is a good human being and I appreciate his friendship and ability to mentor.

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page

1 Dates and Responses to Benefits Survey ………………………….....31

2 Benefit Category Totals, with Percent, by All Types of Industry …….35

3 Benefit Category Totals by Two Most Represented Industry Types ....35

4 Benefit Category Totals by Most Represented Industry Types ……….36

5 Benefit Category Totals by Size of Company ………………………...37

6 Benefit Category Totals by Small, Medium, Large Size Companies ...37

7 Rated Usefulness of Benefit Package for Purpose ……………………39

8 ANOVA of Rated Usefulness of Benefit Package ……………………39

9. Tukey-Kramer Comparison of Recruiting, Retaining Employees

10 Reasons for Choice of Benefits Offered to Employees: Mean

11 ANOVA Showing Reasons for Choice of Benefits Offered to

12. Comparison of Mean Differences between Six Reasons for Benefit Choice…………………………………………………………………42

13 Current Bay Area Study Compared with National Trend …………… 44

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Benefits Survey

Appendix B Cover Letter

Appendix C Request to Receive Copy of Results/Enter Lottery Form

Appendix D Glossary