EGSS Final+Report 130523

Remuneration and Workforce (Cost) Planning Final report
1st draft for discussion
20 May 2013
.
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
Introduction Management Summary Client Situation
IV.
V. VI. VII.
Internal Analysis Summary

External Analysis Workforce Cost Analysis Appendices
2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
The goal of this project is to assess the impact of the planned growth of the EGSS employee base on EGSSs cost effectiveness and the quality and productivity of its workforce
1
Aim of this report
The purpose of this document is to build upon the internal analysis (formulate assumptions and specify recommendations), summarize and present the outcomes of the external labour market analysis (workforce structure and costs) and introduce scenarios of potential implications of the market development on EGSS workforce structure and cost.
2
Two main questions 1) Can workforce of the required profiles be found around Hodonin? 2) What will be the workforce cost implications of the planned EGSS growth? Motto: How to keep personal expenses flat
Our comprehensive approach consisted of the analysis of current state as well as future developments of: Labour market (workforce structure & availability, HR management tools): Current EGSS workforce HR management systems & tools assessment and recommendations to stay effective given the EGSS growth Regional workforce demographics Unemployment and mobility Potential candidate sources in the region (schools, labor office, peer employers)
Internal analysis (EGSS)
Workforce cost (incl. potential scenarios optimistic, realistic, pessimistic): Assessment and benchmarking of the current EGSS compensation levels (base pay, bonuses, benefits) Remuneration costs in view of the EGSS headcount growth and salary development Tax implications and potential grants Onboarding and replacement costs Scenarios of EGSS workforce costs development in the next 5 years (2013-18)
Our approach
External analysis (market)
Data sources: Official statistics: Czech statistical office, Ministry of labor, Czech national bank, Labour offices, etc. Deloittes proprietary databases (surveys, Deloitte Global Research Centre reports, project experience )
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI. VII.

Required workforce is available and possible to recruit in the Hodonn region or alternatively in Brno and Trnava with different workforce costs implications
Q1: Workforce availability
Team & scenario Description Costs structure 2013 Domestic payments Slovakia Favorable availability of required workforce Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs Total Remuneration Total team costs Attraction premiums Grand total team costs Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs 11 603 13 200 13 200 0 0 0 11 614 13 211 0 13 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 13 235 13 278 13 278 11 909 13 842 13 842 13 261 13 304 509 13 813 13 904 19 731 21 390 14 099 21 065 24 067 12 124 17 951 18 520
Q2: Workforce costs implications (most likely scenario)

Yearly costs per FTE (EUR) 2015 14 170 14 223 14 223 13 623 13 676 13 676 14 257 14 309 509 14 817 15 239 16 646 18 190 14 924 17 358 19 704 13 322 14 728 15 096 2016 14 485 14 538 14 538 14 376 14 430 14 430 14 573 14 626 509 15 135 17 574 18 002 19 353 15 773 15 933 18 208 15 151 15 311 15 722 2017 14 855 14 918 14 918 14 743 14 806 14 806 14 946 15 009 509 15 518 18 668 18 856 19 796 19 454 19 642 21 064 16 662 16 850 17 144 2018 15 238 15 303 15 303 15 122 15 187 15 187 15 333 15 398 509 15 906 19 184 19 379 19 967 19 998 20 193 21 046 17 797 17 992 18 227
Domestic payments Austria
Favorable availability of required workforce
Domestic payments Hungary
Moderate risk of unavailability WF in Hodonn. Hiring from Trnava region would require attraction premiums.
Trnava (SR)
Securities
Attraction of Professionals from Brno Reaching the target career structure: 2017 (fully operational) Attraction of Professionals from Brno Reaching the target career structure: 2017 (fully operational) Long-term junior staff development Reaching the target career structure: 2019 (fully operational) Long-term junior staff development Reaching the target career structure: 2019 (fully operational)
Treasury
Securities
Treasury
Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs
0 0 0
11 826 18 793 19 193
13 063 15 498 15 782
15 552 15 712 16 138
16 655 16 843 17 128
18 499 18 694 18 836
Include salary, bonuses, benefits. Include mentoring onboarding costs, fluctuation costs. 3 Include attrition premium cost.
Motto: How to keep personal expenses flat

Keeping the current average Perex flat long-term seems unrealistic due to a couple of facts low current salaries (below the market), market movement and pressures on EGSS to keep up with the market to keep attrition down, most employees at BOF1 levels (expecting to grow in career), etc. Total Perex costs may be optimized through higher productivity and lower headcounts (this change can be supported by transformation of the compensation system toward more commission-like system) to be discussed over our analysis and model.
Legend: High availability of required WF Low availability of required WF
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI. VII.

Erste Group Bank (EGB) has been considering expanding the accountabilities and thus workforce of EGSS by nearshoring specific functions from various EGB locations and centralizing them in Hodonn in the respective timing and FTE volumes
Functions to be nearshored: Planned recruitment phases in EGSS (Sec.&Try to be confirmed):
Team Current location Slovakia Hungary Austria Securities Austria Timing FTEs to EGSS 23,7 22,5 28,28 47,01 26,12 91,99 204,59 74,48 Domestic payments Foreign cheques Investigations Other (admin) Sub Total FTEs Total FTEs
Current workforce in EGSS:

Team Servicing FTEs in EGSS Total FTEs
Foreign payments
Czech rep.
Holding Czech rep. Holding Holding EGSS
12,875
12,5 42 6 7 3 (excl. EGSS top management) 83,375
Domestic payments
Q3/2013 Q3/2013 Q2-3/2014 Q1-2/2014 Q1/2015
Q1/2016
Treasury Austria Q1-2/2014 Q1/2015 Q1/2016
18,86
13,64 24,48 38,12
Total targeted EGSS headcount in 2016: 288 FTEs
Planned EGSS headcount growth (timeline)
Headcount (FTEs)
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI. VII.

Internal analysis, as the first phase of project, focused on internal workforce supply and aimed to evaluate the current HR management systems and tools used in EGSS, compare them with the best market practice and formulate recommendations
Overview of internal analysis key findings: Area Job Profiles Description Considering planned EGSS expansion, Job profiles will need to be enhanced and specified to reflect responsibilities and hiring requirements of each position. Demographic situation at EGSS is settled with no critical risks. Positive finding is a relatively high mobility of employees within the South Moravian region. Remuneration system is internally fair and reflects local markets specifics, however salary benchmarking reveals gaps in EGSS pay competitiveness vs. the market and also the target bonuses should better reflect salary levels. Performance management system provides a solid framework for feedback and reflects all major performance aspects (productivity, quality, skills, competencies and goals), however competencies should more tailored to jobs. Professional development opportunities are well set using the job rotation system, but additional (soft/hard skills and people management) development should be treated systematically, addressing the stoppage of CS trainings. Career model is actively used for HR management, however it needs to be adjusted to reflect EGSS current as well as future situation and needs. Also too broad salary ranges may not represent a clear guideline for pay management. Recruitment has been processed and delivered by S with no critical difficulties. Onboarding trainings are of a high quality, however could be optimized in terms of time efficiency when EGSS builds own capabilities.
Status
Demographics
Remuneration & motivation
Performance management
Development & trainings
Career model
Recruitment & Onboarding

9
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V.

External Analysis
i. ii. Our Approach Covered Areas in Detail
iii.
Regional Labour Market Development Trends - Summary
VI. VII.
Workforce Cost Analysis Appendices
10
External analysis provides holistic and independent view on various areas influencing regional labour market development around Hodonn, while taking into account outcomes of the internal analysis as key inputs and/or assumptions
Our approach
External labour market analysis covers 10 areas: Taxes and Grants & incentives analysis
Input sources
1 Research of all publicly available information:* - standard data sources like official institutes, relevant chambers or agencies (e.g. Czech Statistical Office (S), Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, CzechInvest, etc.) 2 Telephone and Email enquiries: - data gathering from local sources e.g. schools and local labour offices in the region 3 Other data sources: Deloittes surveys in the area of workforce planning**, Deloittes proprietary reward databases and benchmarks*** 4 Internal analysis phase results: Inputs and assumption for the salary cost development analysis and modeling
Planned investments in the region
I
Admin employers and employees in the region
J A
Macroeconomic prognosis Socioeconomic environment and demographics
External analysis
G F D E
Mobility
Remuneration package
Labour market & employment
Educational structure
Unemployment in the SM region in detail
Each area contains: Analysis of the area Key findings summarized in conclusions including assumptions for the cost analysis Status (evaluation of the area) Possible risks and threats to consider
* Official data and statistics for the South Moravian region include Brno which influences the overall picture about the region ** First steps into the labour market, European Salary Survey, Put workforce planning to work, etc. *** Brno excluded from remuneration statistics
11
Table of Contents
I. II. III. IV. V. Introduction Management Summary Client Situation Internal Analysis Summary External Analysis i. ii. Our Approach Covered Areas in Detail A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. iii. VI. VII. Macroeconomic Prognosis Socio-economic Environment and Demographics Labour Market & Employment Unemployment in SM Region in Detail Mobility Educational Structure Remuneration Package Admin Employers and Employees in the Region Planned Investments in the Region Taxes and Grants & incentives Analysis
12
A Macroeconomic Prognosis
Rather pessimistic macroeconomic prognosis for the next 5 years might have on contrary positive impact on EGSS workforce cost development
Analysis
Macroeconomic information South Moravian (SM) region: GDP 2nd most productive economic region after Middle Bohemian region, good GDP per capita Unemployment rate in the SM region higher than the Czech Republic (CR) average SM region on 9th place with Zln region in 2012 (14 regions in the CR ) Current unemployment rate: 8,58% (as at April 2013)* Long term high unemployment rates in the SM region, the highest in districts of Znojmo (10,86%), Hodonn (10,99%) and Beclav (8,63%) In Brno-city unemployment rate of 7,63%, in Brno- rural area 6,28% in 2012 High number of unemployed people consists of educated job seekers at a young age and graduates Macroeconomic prognosis CR: Unemployment rate not too high when compared to the other EU countries, but the highest in R history (7% in 2012) Unemployment prognosis for 2013 and further is even higher regardless seasonal positive deviations Recession should continue recession as a new standard for companies Wages should grow slowly and labour demand should be low
Selected macroeconomic indicators R Selected macroeconomic indicatorsprognosisprognosis - R
Indicator Inflation rate (y/y, %) Unemployment rate (LFS**, %) GPD (real, y/y, %) Market salary increase (nominal, y/y, %) 2012 3,30% 7,00% -1,20% 2,80% 2013 1,70% 7,60% -0,50% 2,80% 2014 1,80% 7,70% 1,80% 2,70% 2015 1,90% 7,30% 2,10% 3,30% 2016 1,10% 6,70% 2,60% 3,00% 2017 2,00% 7,30% 2,30% 3,00% 2018 2,10% 7,60% 2,50% 3,00%
Status
Pessimistic
Threats
Political instability new government to be elected next year, high probability of a change from the right wing got left wing (social democrats) Macroeconomic/ fiscal instability in the European union (EU) in general
Source: Ministry of Finance Survey of macroeconomic forecasts 4/2013, NB prognosis from May 2013, Deloitte
Conclusion/Assumption
Thanks to the negative macroeconomic prognosis, EGSS can expect reasonable nominal wages increases (on average 2,9% for 2014 -2018 period) and also good labour supply because of long-term high unemployment in the region.
*For overview of unemployment's rates in the other regions please see Appendix 1 - Unemployment rate in the CR regional overview **LFS (Labour Force Survey) method according to Eurostat requirements . 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
13
B Socio-economic Environment and Demographics
Demographic situation in the SM region is quite positive for EGSS mainly because of favorable educational structure of the population and the suburbanization trend
Analysis
South Moravian (SM) region basic info: Population (2013): ca. 1 169 ths. inhabitants, out of which ca. 600 000 labour force Size: 719 555 ha (~7 195 km2) Density of population: ca. 159 inhabitants/km2 Districts: 7 (Blansko, Brno-msto, Brno-venkov, Beclav, Hodonn, Vykov, Znojmo), in Hodonn 156 ths. inhabitants Very convenient geographic position in the middle of Europe (Bratislava, Vienna, Prague) Brno is the capital of the region, after Prague the second most Population density in SM region important urban centre (population ca. 380 000 inhabitants) Source: Internet Around one third of people in the SM region live in Brno but because of emerging so called suburbanization trend (i.e. gradual and sustained shift of some residents from cities back to rural areas with attractive natural environment) this share is shrinking Favourable educational structure of the population (a high proportion of university graduates) A high proportion of scientific, technical, medical and teaching staff from the total number of employed persons Compared with other regions, high standard of living and quite high wage levels (influence of Brno) Unfavourable age structure of the population in the region - a high proportion of people aged 65 years and more and at the same time low share of children* The population losses are the highest in district Hodonn main drivers are aging of the existing population, as well as outflow of people in productive age
*South Moravian Region is the third oldest region in the CR after Prague and Zlin region
Status
Fair
Threats
Ageing of population high proportion of 65+ people to children ratio (mainly in Brno but also Hodonn) Outflow of people in productive age
Ageing of population is a European-wide trend which should not be neglected. However, high number of highly educated young people and emerging trend of migration from cities back to rural places can play important positive role in the future. Attraction of people in productive age back to their home towns shall be used in EGSSs advantage.
14 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
C Labour Market and Employment
Population structure by economic activity is strongly influenced by the demographic structure, in particular by the number of retired people
Analysis
Labour market by economic activity in SM: Economically active: 58% out of which: 543 000 employed and 66 000 unemployed (for a breakdown for Hodonin, see the next slide) Economically inactive: the remaining 42% - dominated by retired people. In lower age categories mainly students or people who care for children and/or household Hodonn and Brno districts are older - economically active population is only about 50% here, which is below the SM average (58%) In Trnava region (Slovakia), ca. 53% of economically active population (~ 298 000): 261 000 (88%) employed and 18 000 (12%) unemployed**
Structure of employed by selected sectors: In SM, employed people mostly work in 1) manufacturing industry, 2) wholesale and retail, 3) construction Admin & support services sector**** employs 15 000 people (2,7%), and financial & insurance services 13 000 people (2,4%) In Trnava region (Slovakia) admin & support sector has 6 500 employees (5,7% from employed population) and showed year on year increase of 66% (2012/2011), but financial & insurance services less than 1%
Ths.
Status
Labour market by economic activity (SM region)
Inactive
42% 53% Employed 5%
Fair
Unemployed*** Source: S, 2012
Threats
People with experience are based in Brno and do not want to relocate/commute to Hodonn
100 90 80 70 60 50 0
Total Emloyed
Structure of employed by selected sectors (SM region, sector by company NACE) 26.0% 543 ths.
11.4% 8.6% 2.7%

Manufacturing Wholesale and retail Construction
48.9% 2.4%
Other
Sector
Admin and Financial and support insurance activities
Source: S, 2012
Even though just 5% of employed people work in admin & support services and financial & insurance services, we still have a potential base of ca. 28 ths. people which should have experience from admin support or finance services in the SM region. However, we assume that they are mostly located in Brno district. Moreover, in Trnava region (SK), another 6,5 ths. people work in admin & support services.
15 *Source: Census of Population and Housing 2011 ** Source: Slovak Statistical Office, 2012 *** Does not equal to the general unemployment rate calculated by dividing the number of unemployed to the total labor force **** For number of employed based on a job type (not employer sector) see the section H 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
D Structure of Unemployed in the SM Region in Detail (1/3)
Structure of unemployed people in Hodonn is very convenient for targeted profile of Domestic payments for Slovakia and Austria, but ...
Analysis
In the Hodonn district, there were more than 12 000 of unemployed people as at December 2012, which makes around 50 people per one job vacancy (# of active vacancies based on MPSV/Labour offices) In our main targeted region**, there are more than 14 ths. unemployed people, out of which 1,212 met requirements of EGSS targeted profile* defined based on Internal analysis results Just in Hodonn town, we found 158 suitable candidates Considering even broader region (whole district of Hodonn, Beclav, Uhersk Hradit and Skalica), we would found 1,917 suitable candidates
Nr. of unemployed as at December 2012 2,229 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0
Total Just Hodonn town Remaing Beclav and towns in Uhersk Hodonn Hradit disctrict plus distrcit Skalica district
Status
Good
# of unemployed 29,014 30,000
# of unemployed 1,917 2,000 1,500 1,917 from all unemployed people meeting targeted requirements based on age, education and language
Nr. of targeted unemployed by different regions 1,212 158
*Targeted profile
- all unemployed people in preferred age range 20-45 - both men and women - with at least secondary education ("matura") and - at least basic knowledge of English language - we assume that people in age rage 2045 have basic knowledge of PC skills needed for EGSS purposes
12,309 14,476
1,054 1,000 500 0

Total (~Hodonn, Beclav,and Uhersk Hradit disctricts Only Hodonn town Towns in Remaining range of 30- towns in 40 km of Beclav and Hodonn** Uhersk Hradit
705
Region
Main targeted region Source: Labour Office Hodonn, 4/2013; Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs , S
** Just towns in the closest distance from Hodonn with good travel connection, for exact list of towns see Appendix 2 - Definition of the closest targeted region 16 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
... for Hungary region and P levels of Securities & Treasury EGSS should consider candidates from more distant areas ...
Analysis
For S&T positions we also looked at the candidates with active German language skills. Number of candidates with at least passive English language skills and active German is much lower 112 in main targeted region, 207 in broader region (see graph below)
# of unemployed 1,200 1,000 800 158 (13%) 0
Only Hodonn town Towns in range of 3040 km of Hodonn**
Status
# of unemployed people with targeted profile A1* (at least pasive English) vs. active German in addition 1,054 (8%) 705 (5%) 14 (1%) 98 (1%) 95 (1%)
Remaining tows in Beclav and Uhersk Hradit
Source: Labour Office Hodonn, 4/2013; Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs , S)
Good Special requirement for S&T positions
at least pasive English
Main targeted region
at least pasive English + active German in addition
Total EGSS demand (targeted state in 5 yrs.)

Domestic payments DP HU DP AT Treasury & Securities Treasury Securities 3 6 1 6 17 24 1 6 14,5 21,5 1 6 21 28 1 1 6 34 42 38 92 3 21 5 8 14 8 52 10
Level/Teams L3 P2 (~L2) P1 (~L1) A3 A2 A1 SUM
DP SK
DP CZ
20%, ie. 4 A+ 1 P should speak fluent Hungarian *** Labour office does not tract data about previous experience
- for A levels (at least 30% intermediate German, 100% intermediate English, basic admin experience Market supply of unemployed workforce - for P levels (in just in Hodonn town: 158 candidates addition requirement of with targeted profile out of which 14 with experience from additional German administrative/financial In the area +/-30-40 km: 1,212 work at least 2-3 candidates with targeted profile out years***) of which 112 with additional German in Hodonn, Beclav and Uhersk Hradit and Skalica (SK) districts: 1,917 candidates with targeted profile out of which 207 with additional German
17
... for example to attract Hungarian speaking candidates from Slovakia or experienced S&T people from Brno region
Status
In the main targeted region (Hodonn ~ 30-40 km) there is currently a solid base of candidates with the desired profile (1,212) out of which 112 candidates have in addition active German language Considering EGSS future needs for workforce headcount, we assume that it is feasible to find suitable candidates for nearshoring Domestic Payments of SK and AT within the closest Hodonn region More difficulties can occur with 5 FTEs with Hungarian language and P levels for Securities & Treasury due to required admin/finance experience where EGSS should consider more options. For example: 1) to nearshore Hungarian speaking candidates from Slovakia (e.g. from the Trnava district - 5% of population is Hungarian speaking and unemployment is 10%, 70 km from Hodonin). If more Hungarian speaking people are needed in the future, Dunajska Streda with 80% of population being Hungarians and unemployment rate high (13%) might be a good source, but Dunajska Streda is too far for daily commuting (150 km), so EGSS may need to provide some sort of accommodation support to these people. 2) to find Hungarian speaking people in broader distance from Hodonn but within the SM region, as, according to the last Census of Population and Housing in 2011, there are currently 351 people with Hungarian nationality between 20-49 years, so there is a high chance to find 5 candidates even in SM 3) for P levels of Securities&Treasury, EGSS will need to motivate candidates with the required profile and experience to travel (or relocate) from more distant places (mainly Brno).
Good
Threats
number of unemployed people will decline rapidly Candidates wil not pass the tests / competence criteria it will be too expensive to find experienced P levels of Treasury & Securities
18
E Mobility (1/2)
Mobility of the population in the SM region is supported by a good infrastructure. People in Hodonn district are used to commute to work
Analysis
Mobility in general - overview: SM region is connected to majority of centers by a good road and railway infrastructure (Praha, Bratislava, Ostrava, by train also Vienna)* 245 000 of people commute to work in the SM region (ca. 40% of labour force), out of which 62 000 to another district and 12 000 to another region In Hodonn district, 30 000 of people commute to work (19% of whole population), out of which 4 000 to another district and 3 500 to another region In Brno district, 83 000 of people (22% of whole population) commute to work, out of which 7 000 to another district and 3 to another region - see also the graphs below:
Ths. 400 370 (100%) 83 (22%) 50 7 (2%) 0
Whole population (ths.) out of which those who ... ... commute ... commute to ... commute to to work within work to work to the district another district another region
Status
Excellent
Ths.
Threats
Hodonn
400
Brno
300 200
3 (1%)
Population
156 (100%) 30 (19%)

Whole ... commute population (ths.) to work within out of which the district those who ...
100 0
4 (3%)
... commute to work to another district
4 (2%)
... commute to work to another region
Source: Census of Population and Housing 2011
Moreover, according to the last Census of Population and Housing (2011), in the SM region, more than 2 000 people commute to work longer than 90 minutes and almost 8 000 commute to work 60-89 minutes
Only the train connection to Vienna (not highway) can complicate long-term training of experts for Securities & Treasury in Vienna (low risk, but applicable mainly to candidates with families that cannot relocate to Vienna for 6 months)
Population in the Hodonn district is used to commute to work, probably due to higher unemployment in the region. At the same time, 1,5% (~ 8 ths.) from employed people in the SM region commute to work more than 60 minutes. That is why we conclude that people around Hodonn will be willing to commute to work.
19 * For detailed map please see Appendix 3 - Transport infrastructure 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
E Mobility (2/2)
Public travel connections within the Hodonn region are very favourable railway and also a good road network with regular bus/train connections
Analysis
Transportation options to reach Hodonn: Hodonn ~ 30-40 km: Transport infrastructure is very good there are regular buses and train connections to closest towns (see the table below) Hodonn, Beclav, Uhersk Hradit: Transport infrastructure is good there are regular buses and train connections (minimum 1-2 buses and/or train per morning/afternoon) Connection to Brno: There are bus and train connections, but it takes more than 1 hour to get to Hodonn. Connection to Slovakia (Trnava, Dunajsk Streda): Trnava can be reached by bus in ca.1,5 hours (one-way), but, as mentioned before, not such a high concentration of Hungarian speaking population is available here (ca.2 0%~130 ths.). Dunajsk Streda has just 1 train connection (ca. 3 hours journey) and no suitable bus connections
Mean of transport Bus Route Hodonn < 10 km Hodonn < 20 km Hodonn < 30 km Train Hodonn < 10 km Hodonn < 20 km Hodonn < 30 km Bus + Train Hodonn < 40 km * except Skalica/Senica with just 1 connection # of connections# of connectionsmorning (6:30-8:30) afternoon (17:00-19:00) 6-8 5-6 2-3 2-3 2-4 1-2 2-4 2-3 2-3* 2-3 2-3 1-2 1-2 3-5 Source: Internet
Status
Excellent
Threats
High costs to motivate experienced people from Brno region and Hungarian speaking people from South Slovakia to travel/relocate to Hodonn
Public travel connections within the Hodonn district are very favourable, no problem to reach Hodonn. Connections with Brno take more than 1 hour, so if EGSS would like to nearshore experienced S&T people from Brno, there must be another motivation (e.g. higher wage and/or benefits, such as pool cars for private purposes or a transportation allowance, potentially also housing&relocation support) to motivate people to travel to Hodonn. The same applies to Hungarian-speaking people that may be best available from Slovakia (Trnava or Dunajska Streda) where transportation connections is not good for Dunask Streda but feasible for Trnava.
F Educational Structure
Educational structure very favourable mainly thanks to Brno. Candidates for Domestic Payment jobs can be chosen from secondary schools graduates. For S&T jobs, university graduates may be attracted via internship offer with promise of future full-time job
Analysis
Educational structure in SM region: very favorable educational structure, university educated people represent 10% of the population aged 15 and over more than 80 thousand of university students (mainly Brno), thousands of graduates each year after Prague, the highest percentage of college and high school educated population education of employees in the region gradually increases enough of above-average number of qualified workforce Unemployed gradutes: At the same time, high numberof unemployed young graduates, just in Hodonn disctrict 253 of unemployed graduates (secondary shool with maturaor university graduates) in evidence of Labour office, out of which 236 has no previous working experience. Secondary shools: There are 13 secondary schools in Hodonn and another dozen in Beclav district. Each of them produce on average 100 candidates with high probability to have basic English language skills. For a list of secondary schools in district Hodonn and Beclav and their potential evaluation for EGSS please see table in Appendix 4 - Secondary shools overview in Hodonn and Beclav district. Universities: 13 Universitties in whole SM region, majority of them base in Brno. For more information about main universities (with economic specialization), approximate number of graduates and their language skills please see Appendix 5 Universities overview in South Moravia
Educational structure in SM region
Status
Excellent Threats
No willingness and motivation to relocate/stay/return to Hodonn Majority of students will choose continuation of studies at the university instead of start working
Very good educational structure with hundreds of secondary schools and universities graduates in the region. Great potential source for candidates for EGSS. At the same time, based on selected telephone enquiries with selected schools, majority of grammar schools (Gymnasium) and also business colleges graduates continue to university studies. This can be because of high unemployment rate in the region - they better continue studying as stay at home. Another opportunity for EGSS arises - how to attract secondary schools graduates to stay in the region and start attractive job (Domestic Payments positions) and motivate universities graduates to return to Hodonn (for S&T jobs) eg. through cooperation with universities (offer intership and then full-time position)
G Remuneration Package
EGSS base and total salaries are below the market EGSS will have to carefully balance the compensation costs with the risk of attrition increase due to poor pay conditions
Analysis
The benchmarking of EGSS salaries against the peer market (see the document Internal analysis) revealed that avg. EGSS total cash salaries at all job levels are below the market median, specifically: ~20% below the market at the BOF1 level ~10% below the market at the BOF2 level ~40% below the market for team leaders (BOF4 level), or 20-28% below when comparing to BOF3 When looking at the Czech vs. Slovak market comparison, Czech salaries are generally higher in all comparable sectors and regions at the base pay and benefits levels. Slovakia catches up CZ slightly at the total cash level due to higher bonuses paid there see Appendix 8 for more detail. The typical remuneration package in the South Moravian region can be described as follows (in CZK, gross monthly figures, based on market data in the SM region for FSI, Admin and Share Service Centres):
45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0
A1 A2 A3 P1/TL1 P2/TL2
Status
Fair
Threats
Increase in EGSS attrition due to lower salaries comparing to the market Pressures on EGSS personal costs increase Outflow of people from the region to higher paid regions, e.g. Brno (especially at P level)
Benefits Bonus Base salary 24,250 3,000 4,250 17,000
Typical remuneration package on the market 35,360 29,250 3,000 5,250 5,000 5,060
42,200 5,000 6,200
27,125 3,000 4,825 19,300
21,000
25,300
31,000
Benefits provided on the market (value/year, % of prevalence for admin): Meal vouchers (CZK 10 700 employer part, i.e. CZK 42 / day, 72%) Extra vacation days (5 days, 96%) Pension contribution (CZK 6 000, 67%) Capital life insurance contribution (CZK 5 000, 25%) Risk life insurance (~annual salary in case of death, 25%) Special medical care (CZK 2 500, 55%) Transportation allowance (22%)
In the next five years horizon, we assume EGSS salary increases to be slightly above the market movement in order to bring salaries closer to market levels and to avoid undesired increase in attrition rates. As a base for the new salary structure and ranges (draft of the new compensation management guidelines including entry level salaries - see the draft of the new Career model for details), we took a combination of the most relevant markets (SM region FSI and SM region admin jobs) while still reflecting lower positioning of EGSS comparing to the market median due to specifics of Hodonn region ( high long-term unemployement and lower living standards compared to other CZ regions)
H Admin Employers and Employees in the Region
No major employers from administration sector in Hodonn area. Big companies from admin/back office/customer support just around Brno
Analysis
Nr. of companies Major employers within Hodonn district: 19 the biggest companies (500+ employees) are from: 20 Number of major employers in Hodonn vs. rest of the district - road freight transport (SAD Hodonn), 15 12 - food processing industry (The Candy Plus Sweet Factory, 9 10 Jednota, spotebn drustvo) and 5 5 5 - manufacturing industry (Jihomoravsk armaturka) 4 5 3 middle companies (200-400 employees) mainly from: 1 0 0 - manufacturing industry (Lignit Hodonn, Okna Macek, 500 - 999 250 - 499 200 - 249 100 - 199 50 - 99 MND Drilling & Services,T Machinery, roubrna Kyjov) Nr. of employees Source: Internet Hodonn bigger companies mainly based in Hodonn town Other towns in Hodonn district for full list of companies over 100 employees see Appendix 9 - Overview of major employers in Hodonn district Major employers in Skalica district e.g. INA Skalica, Eissmann Hol, Protherm Skalica, Grafobal - do not include admin employers as well. Employement situation in Senica is worst than in Skalica less big employers, higher unemployement rate (major employers: OMS Doj, 101 Drogrie, Delphi . Admin/back office/customer support employers in SM region: Most relevant players for EGSS: Motorola Solutions CZ (customer support, foreign languages), PPG Industries Czech Republic s.r.o (SSC accountin services), Infosys BPO s.r.o. (customer support) almost all based in Brno with one exception call centre AMAX which has also branch in Hodonn (less than 100 employees) for overview of all companies from admin/back office/customer support see Appendix 10 - Overview of admin/back office/customer support companies in SM region Number of admin employees based on a job type:* Czech republic: 305 000, South Moravia: 22 000 Trnava region (SK): 9 126, Skalica & Senica districts: 1 744
Status
Poor
Threats
not enough people with relevant experiences for S&T positions in Hodonn district headhunting of S&T specialist from Brno too expensive
No big admin/back office/customer support employers in the Hodonn district or Skalica/Senica district (SK). We assume that for S&T positions which required experience from administration (preferable finance), EGSS might have problems to find these specialist in close Hodonn district and should consider looking at further market (Brno).
23
* Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs statistics for Czech Republic and Slovak Statistical Office
I Planned Investments in the Region
Even though, there are no certain planned investment in close Hodonn except one call centre, a risk of new investors entrance is valid
Analysis
Investment conditions in South Moravian region are in general very good mainly because of: qualified educated workforce good infrastructure supported by a quite high mobility of population strategic geographic position good connections to major centres (Prague, Bratislava, Vienna) science & research, Brno considered as Silicon Valley of Czech Republic great potential source of workforce mainly from IT industry (due to high number of University students) For overview of planned investments in the region see the table below close to Hodonn just one planned investment call centre of BEI Multidemia Interactive in old tobacco plant Based on telephone enquiries of Munipical Office in Hodonn - not planned investments for next years are confirmed yet but Hodonn town is open to inflow of investors, many unused brownfields in Hodonn district (see Appendix 7 - Overview of brownfields in Hodonn district)
Overview of planned investments in SM region Organization Number of emloyees cca 100 by the end of 2013 20-30 software and testing engineers 200 Sector When? Town Investition 0.8 million EUR + additional 0.3 million EUR on recruitment of new employees and training
Status
Good
Threats
entry of new investor in Hodonn disctrict
Gardner Denver
European shared services centre new research and development centre new centre of excellence
End of 2013
Brno
Baumer CEITEC - Central European Institute of Technology BEI Multimedia Interactive
March 2013 End of 2014
Brno Brno 300 million EUR
400 (200 by the end Call Centre of 2013)
Planned from April 2013 but postponed Hodonn to June 2013 (?) Source: Internet
SM region has very good conditions for investments in general, but no investment planned in Hodonn district in near future except one call centre which could be potential competitor of EGSS (similar profile and wages ranges 13-25 000 CZK) but it still did not open despite of previous press announcements.
* Brownfields are abandoned or underused industrial and commercial facilities available for re-use through revitalization 24 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
J Taxes and Grants & Incentives Analysis (1/2)
The Czech tax environment will likely change in the next years, but mainly for employees. Employers may benefit from lower social security contributions
Analysis of Tax environment
Information on the Tax and Social security rates in 2013:
* Super-gross salary is the gross income of an employee increased by the compulsory insurance contributions paid by the employer Employee Health insurance Social insurance (sickness, retirement, unemployment) Sub-total (social security & health insurance) Tax (applied on the super-gross salary*) 4,5% 6,5% 11% 15%** Employer 9% 25% 34% -
Status
Good Threats
Unpredictability of the tax environment due to election in 2014 current government gets weaker in enforcing planned changes, new government will likely be socialistic The decrease in employers social security cost may be offset by lower limits for benefits taxdeductibility (e.g., meal vouchers)
**A solidarity surcharge of 7% is applied on income increasing CZK 103,000 per mon
Maximum assessment base for social security (cap) is CZK 1 242 432 per year Maximum assessment base for health insurance was eliminated with effect from 1 January 2013 Corporate tax is 19% For example of potential implications, see Appendix 6 Comparison of Income Tax Tax environment changes planned for 2013-2015: Payments in 2013 vs. 2015 Changes relating to parts of insurance contributions paid by employers Social security and health insurance contributions paid by employers will be replaced by the aggregate payroll tax in the amount of 32.4% (instead of 34%) to be implemented as of 2014 or 2015 The employee health insurance rate will increase from z 4.5% to 6.5% Gross salary as the income tax base (instead of super-gross salary) with a tax rate of 19% A cap of CZK 10 000 p.a. for wealth benefits (recreation, health, culture, sport, training / Flexi passes) to be exempt from tax and SS&H insurance on employee side (for employer always non tax-deductible cost) Tax environment outlook for 2015-2018 (mostly relevant to employees only): Likely introduction of a progressive tax rate due to next election (June 2014, social democrats will win) Support for taxpayers with average and low income and families with children is expected (likely to be reflected in social allowances rather than in tax reliefs) Possible changes in employee benefits as a result of trade union lobbying (tax relief of meal vouchers is still a hot topic the government wants to cease it, public and Unions have been strong in resistance. However, future of meal vouchers tax advantages is uncertain and dependent on political development).
Conclusion / Assumption
Most forecasted changes will apply to employees only. The most relevant (and positive) change for employers is the planned decrease in SSH insurance rates from 34% to 32,4%. However, the effective date is not known yet, therefore we reflected this change in the various scenarios of the workforce cost modelling (will be effective from 2014 / 2015 /will not become effective at all).
25 * SSH Social Security & Health Insurance 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
J Taxes and Grants & Incentives Analysis (2/2)
There are three main categories for possible incentives

Analysis of possible Grants & incentives
Type of incentive 1) Investment Incentives shared service centres Applicability to EGSS
Status
Eligibility and opportunity
Applicable to SSC and activities (jobs) related to internal process, not to a common activity of a bank and client related work (i.e., not sure if EGSS will qualify). Potential grant up to EUR 1 845 984* Currently no open grant program relevant for EGSS, but new programs are being prepared - detailed rules &conditions are expected to be published at the end of 2013 Possible CIT relief of 18 000 CZK/disabled employee (minor and moderate disability) or 60 000 CZK (major disability). Employment of min 4% of disabled people compulsory for all employers with more than 25 employees.
Good
Threats
EGSS will not qualify for the Investment Incentives (pessimistic scenario) A fine is applied by the Tax Authorities if the requirement on disabled people employment is not met
2) Cash grants
3) Company Income Tax (CIT) relief due to employment of disabled people
*For detailed analysis of possible Grants & incentives 1) and 2) and their relevance to EGSS please see the embedded PowerPoint deck:
Conclusion / Assumption
There are opportunities for EGSS to get financial support for its growth. Eligibility of EGSS to the investment incentive related to shared service centers must be further examined as core banking activities may be excluded. New programs (cash grants) may be announced at the end of this year. In the meantime, EGSS can benefit from employment of disabled people through increased tax relief limits.
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V.

External Analysis
i. ii. Our Approach Covered Areas in Detail
iii.
VI. VII.
27
Regional Labour Market Development Trends Summary

Area
Macroeconomic Prognosis
Socioeconomic Environment and Demographics Labour Market & Employment Unemployment in the SM Region in Detail
Status
Trends & future developments Pessimistic prognosis for the main macroeconomic indicators and probable change in politics (social democrats likely to win elections in 2014) might have on contrary positive impact on EGSS cost development. There is a high number of highly educated young people in the SM region and emerging trend of migration from cities back to rural places can play important positive role in the future. However, SM region is the 3rd oldest region in CZ. Aging of population could have negative influences on labour market in the future. In particular, Hodonn and Brno districts are older - economically active population is only about 50% here, which is below the SM average (58%) Long term high unemployment rate in Hodonn region might ensure stable source of workforce mainly for Domestic Payments positions. Both willingness of people to commute to work and transport infrastructure in the region is very good and there are no indicators it should change in the future Future opportunities for EGSS consists of 1) attracting secondary schools graduates to stay in the region and 2) motivate universities graduates to return to Hodonn (for S&T jobs) e.g. through cooperation with universities EGSS base and total salaries are below the market which may increase a risk of workforce attrition increase due to poor pay conditions No major employer acts in the administration sector in the Hodonn area. Big companies from admin/back office/customer support are around Brno which can overprice nearshoring of potential experience S&T candidates SM region has very good conditions for investments in general, but no concrete investment is planned in Hodonn district in the near future except one call centre which may drain some admin workforce off the labor market. The most relevant (and positive) change for employers is the planned decrease in social security & health insurance rates from 34% to 32,4% (should be effective from 2014 or 2015, still pending government approval)
Mobility
Educational Structure
Remuneration Package Admin Employers and Employees in the Region Planned Investments in the Region Taxes and Grants & Incentives Analysis
28
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI.

External Analysis Workforce Cost Analysis
i. ii. iii. Approach Assumptions & Inputs EGSS Cost Development Scenarios
VII.
Appendices
29
Workforce cost analysis approach The workforce cost analysis is based on the Erste group near-shoring feasibility studies and Deloittes recommendations for implementation, reflecting various development and recruiting scenarios
Preconditions
EGSS expansion scope Scope based on Erste Group nearshoring feasibility studies (SSC payments, Securities & Treasury nearshoring feasibility study) Five years horizon of development (2013-2018)
Workforce Costs Model structure

Scope of analysis 1) Current EGSS teams International payments holding, International payments CS, Foreign cheques, Investigation holing, Domestic payment CS 2) To be nearshored teams Domestic payments Slovakia Austria Hungary Recruiting scenario A (hiring all in Hodonin)
Recommendations in the context of EGSS expansion (used as inputs - need to be validated) Organization structure High level career model & salary ranges Staffing plan & targeted career structure per teams
Securities&Treasury
Recruiting scenario B (need to attract people from Slovakia/Trnava) Recruiting scenario A (hiring at 1 below the targeted career level, allowing to be fully operational in 2017 , but need to attract ca. 20% candidates from Brno) Recruiting scenario B (hiring low at A1 or A3 levels, mostly in Hodonin, but allowing to be fully operational only in 2019)
3 scenarios of external environment development (with impacts on EGSS environment) Positive scenario (optimistic) Realistic scenario (most likely) Negative scenario (pessimistic)
Structure of the workforce costs analysis Remuneration costs (including related taxes) Base salary Bonuses Benefits Fluctuation costs & Onboarding costs (mentoring new hires at EGSS) Additional costs to attract the required workforce from more distant areas
30
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI.

VII.
Appendices
31
Organization structure Organizational structure in the context of EGSS expansion should be extended by Group leaders in order to keep the span of control reasonable
Targeted structure after implementation of all nearshoring waves Description
EGSS executive management Recommended span of control of managers and leaders in SSC: 715 FTEs, depending on their role and level of standardization of teams activities. Therefore, DP teams can have higher span of control (simple processes), while Sec&Try TLs should be supported by deputies. Group leaders are recommended as a new management level in the new expanded EGSS Each team contains 1 FTE of a team leader and TL deputies / desk leaders, if necessary Treasury Group 1 FTE 3 TL; 38,5 FTE 554 Team 13,7 FTE Group leaders competencies: Group processes supervisor (continuously looks for enhancements in processes) People manager (ensuring that human resources are effectively allocated, managing current & future people development and staffing plan with respect to fluctuation and targeted organization structure) Operational / Managerial ratio: 0:100 Team leaders competencies: Accountable for ensuring that all transactions within assigned process are carried out in timely and efficient manner (quality, productivity). People management (reporting, development, mentoring, performance mgmt., etc.) Operational / Managerial ratio: 50:50 (currently 40:60) Pros Optimal span of control with effective processes and specialization of business units Enhancement in human resources management Cons Higher personal expenses on Group leaders
IT Support; 1 FTE* HR; 1 FTE* 285 FTE Domestic payments Group 1 FTE 4 TL; 114,5 FTE DP CS Team 42 FTE Holding & International Group 1 FTE 4 TL; 36,5 FTE Investigation Hld. Team 7 FTE
Admin support; 3 FTE
Securities Group 1 FTE 7 TL; 92,2 FTE 553 Team 20,2 FTE 551 Team 8 FTE
DP SK Team 22,7 FTE
Foreign ChequesTeam 6 FTE
569 Team 16,2 FTE 552 Team 9,6 FTE 557 Team 6,3 FTE 559 Team 14,3 FTE 857 Team 15,4 FTE
555 Team 17,9 FTE
DP HU Team 21,5 FTE
International P. CS Team 12,8 FTE
564 Team 6,5 FTE
DP AT Team 28,3 FTE
International P. Hld. Team 12,5 FTE
Organizational structure valid also when excluding Securities & Treasury (130 FTE)
Scope of the workforce cost analysis and modeling

32 *Recommended for the expanded EGSS organization including S&T, outsourcing not considered.
Career model draft recommendation by Deloitte Considering workforce demographics in the SM region, career model should be focused on internal development and career growth
Salary ranges (monthly gross base salaries)

Role Level Base salary range
Career growth and targeted structure (2018)

FTEs 24
21,5 28
42
13
12
38
92 1
Sum
14
Min A1 Admin A2 A3 14 15,5 17,5 20,5 24 20,5 24 28 33
Mid 16 18 20,5 24 28 24 28 33 39
Max 18 20,5 24 28 33 28 33 39 46
Level GL2
GL1 L3 TL2 / P2 TL1 / P1 A3 A2 A1
1 3
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 3 6 8 14
12 24
1 2 1 7 2
Professional
P1 P2 TL1
1
1
1
3 8
1
3 7,5
1
1 3
1
4
3
21 5
8
52 10
19
85 57,5 86,5
Team Leader TL2 TL3 Group Leader GL1
6 34
17 14,5 21
GL2
39
46
54
Thousands CZK Salary ranges should be reviewed annually (not necessarily increased, but checked to reflect the market) Career levels have been adjusted to link with the Erste Group structure Salary ranges for lower team leaders are at the same level as professionals in order to allow various career paths for senior professionals with key know-how as well as the traditional managerial path.
Example of an average S&T teams career structure
Organization focused on internal development and career growth (hire low & grow, replace internally and hire at lowest entry level again) General EGSS entry level is A1 (relevant for Domestic payments) System of jumpers on Admin and Professional levels remains (knowledge of processes) Management of an employee's career should reflect his potential and ambitions and also team assignment (current and desired team, even at the same career level lateral moves)
33
Development scenarios The cost analysis model reflects three scenarios of macroeconomic development with impact on EGSS workforce management indicators
Scenarios (in relation to EGSS) Statistics Description Negative macroeconomic prognosis with low GDP growth and high unemployment No new employers / investments in the region Low fluctuation of EGSS employees Tax reform effective from 2014 (favorable to employer) Low EGSS salary increases Most likely macroeconomic prognosis with moderate GDP growth and stable unemployment rate Tax reform effective from 2015 (favorable to employers) Expected moderate fluctuation of EGSS employees Moderate EGSS salary increases Positive macroeconomic prognosis with higher GDP growth and descending unemployment Appearance of new employers and investments in region (competitors on the labor market) Higher fluctuation of EGSS employees Pressure on salary increases Tax reform not passed and implemented Higher EGSS salary increases
1
Positive
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 1,7% 1,5% 1,5% 0,8% 1,7% 1,7% Inflation rate (y/y) 7,6% 8,2% 8,3% 8,7% 9,0% 9,0% Unemployment rate* -0,5% 1,5% 1,8% 2,4% 2,1% 2,2% GDP (real, y/y) Market salary increase (nom., y/y) 2,8% 1,8% 2,0% 1,5% 2,2% 2,3% EGSS fluctuation 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% EGSS salary increase (nom., y/y) 4,9% 1,5% 1,0% 1,2% 1,7% 1,7% Employer SSHI (%) 34% 32,4% 32,4% 32,4% 32,4% 32,4%
1,5% 8,5% 1,6% 2,1% 5,0% 2,0%
2
Most likely
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 1,7% 1,8% 1,9% 1,1% 2,0% 2,1% Inflation rate (y/y) 7,6% 7,7% 7,3% 6,7% 7,3% 7,6% Unemployment rate* -0,5% 1,8% 2,1% 2,6% 2,3% 2,5% GDP (real, y/y) Market salary increase (nom., y/y) 2,8% 2,7% 3,0% 3,0% 3,0% 3,0% EGSS fluctuation 6% 6% 7% 7% 8% 8% EGSS salary increase (nom., y/y) 4,9% 3,0% 3,5% 3,5% 3,5% 3,5% Employer SSHI (%) 34% 34% 32,4% 32,4% 32,4% 32,4%
1,8% 7,4% 1,8% 2,9% 7,0% 3,7%
3
Negative
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 1,7% 2,1% 2,3% 2,0% 3,8% 4,0% 2,7% Inflation rate (y/y) 7,6% 7,3% 6,6% 5,7% 5,9% 5,6% 6,5% Unemployment rate* -0,5% 2,0% 2,5% 3,0% 3,0% 3,0% 2,2% GDP (real, y/y) Market salary increase (nom., y/y) 2,8% 3,1% 4,4% 4,0% 3,9% 4,2% 3,7% EGSS fluctuation 7% 9% 10% 11% 12% 13% 10,3% EGSS salary increase (nom., y/y) 4,9% 4,0% 4,7% 4,7% 5,0% 5,2% 4,8% Employer SSHI (%) 34% 34% 34% 34% 34% 34%
Sources: Statistics and forecasts by official institutions or Deloitte assumption (for detailed sources per indicator, see the Excel model)
34
* Unemployment rate (Czech republic, method LFS, age 15-64, %)
Assumptions Assumptions used for the workforce cost calculation model are parameterized and can be further modified based on discussion with you
Category Assumption
Staffing
The staffing plan was calculated based on the Erste Group feasibility studies and reflects the suggested EGSS org. structure and career model. Career development in all teams is reflected in the staffing model with the aim to reach the targeted career structure by 2018 at latest. FTEs count was rounded on full time or half-time. Potential decrease of EGSS headcount (due to efficiency enhancement and decline in paper based transactions) has not been considered. Average yearly costs per FTE are calculated based on average headcount of the respective year. EGSS executive management (2 FTE) and admin support (3 FTE) not included in the cost analysis.
Remuneration
Remuneration costs are linked to the development scenarios (mainly annual salary increases and fluctuation costs). The remuneration costs are based on the current average salaries, on our assumption of average salary for the currently unpopulated career levels and on the new salary structure for new hires entry salaries (minimum of the respective salary range is applied to new hires till their promotion; after promotion, average salary for the respective career level is applied). Salaries of all EGSS employees (based on a staffing plan for the respective period) are reviewed once per year (in January). Promotions are linked to calendar year (valid from January). After promotion, remuneration is based on average salary at the new career level. Bonuses are considered as target bonuses under the current system (i.e. maximum value of CZ 3 800 / month). Alternative of bonuses expressed as % of base salary can be changed in the model parameters (Admin & Professionals 25%, Team leader and Group leaders 20%). Benefits are considered as yearly average benefits value received by an employee. Sick days and 5 extra vacation days not included. Fluctuation costs calculated as productivity loss of a new hire and mentoring cost related to a new hire (parameters are team specific): Productivity loss: % of entry salaries for a given period (team specific, e.g. 50% of 3 months at domestic payments)). Mentoring costs: Average salary of an internal mentor (team specific level) for on-boarding period (team specific) for part of time (%). The following items not reflected in the model: Savings related to lower entry salaries comparing to salaries being replaced; Salary savings due to vacancy time (considered to be covered by jumpers or overtime); Other recruitment costs (advertisements, assessments, etc.). Reflecting only internal mentoring costs for new hires (based on recruitment waves). External training (outside of EGSS, e.g. in domestic countries) neglected. On-boarding costs calculated as a productivity loss of a new hire and internal mentoring cost same logic as fluctuation costs, see above Productivity loss: same logic as fluctuation costs, see above Mentoring costs: Average salary of an internal mentor (team specific level) for on-boarding period (team specific) for part of time (%). For each recruitment wave, we count 1 mentor per 10 new hires. In case of hiring Hungarian speakers from the Trnava region, a Transportation allowance is added to the overall remuneration costs, reflecting travel expense costs to support willingness to travel to Hodonin. Accommodation support/allowance not included. In case of hiring experienced workforce from Brno, a Market premium is added to the overall remuneration costs. Market premium reflects: Salaries differential (in Brno), relocation allowance (willingness to travel or to relocate), travel expenses. Accommodation support not included.
Fluctuation
On-boarding
Domestic payments Hungary

Securities & Treasury
35
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI.

VII.
Appendices
36
Teams: All teams, excluding Securities & Treasury Staffing plan is the key input into the EGSS workforce cost calculations
Teams: International payments holding, International payments CS, Foreign cheques, Investigation holding, Domestic Payments CS, Domestic Payments HU, Domestic Payments SK, Domestic Payments AT
Description Development potential of the current workforce (in the current teams) is favorable to achieve the targeted career structure (employees want to grow, while external job opportunities are limited). Availability of the required workforce for the to-be nearshored teams: Low risk of unavailability of the required workforce for Domestic payments SK and Domestic payments AT Moderate risk of unavailability of required workforce for Domestic payments Hungary due to requirements on Hungarian speaking FTEs Domestic payments Hungary Specific Requirements: 5 advanced Hungarian speakers (4 operators, 1 TL) Scenarios: High probability: Hiring from Hodonn (or South Moravian) region with no additional costs. Low probability: Impossible to hire in Hodonn region; Hiring from Trnava region with additional premium costs (transportation allowance) of 136 EUR / employee / month. For the total costs of this transportation premium see Attraction premiums on the following slide.
Staffing plan
Team
Status / Level A1 A2 A3 P1 P2 TL1 TL2 TL3 sum GL1 GL2
Domestic Domestic Domestic Payments CS Payments HU Payments SK Grow Grow As-Is To-Be As-Is To-Be As-Is To-Be As-Is To-Be As-Is To-Be Hire Hire to to 2 7 2 2 2 41 34 20,5 14,5 23 17 3,5 7,5 5 8 2 4 2 2 6 6 6 7 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
International payments holding
International payments CS
Foreign cheques
Investigation holding
Domestic Payments AT Grow Hire to 27 21 6 1
The targeted staffing at career levels (To-Be or Grow to by 2018) is based on a Deloittes assumption and is reflected in the cost calculation model.
1 Group Leaders included in the calculation.
1
12,5 12,5 13
1
13 1 6
1
6 6 6 42 42 21,5 21,5 1 24 24 28 28
Current EGSS teams

37
Team to be nearshored to EGSS
Teams: All teams, excluding Securities & Treasury EGSS workforce costs development (based on the staffing plan on previous slide)
Teams: International payments holding, International payments CS, Foreign cheques, Investigation holding, Domestic Payments CS, Domestic Payments HU, Domestic Payments SK, Domestic Payments AT
Scenarios Workforce costs development (EUR)*
2013 Yearly Yearly Costs structure costs costs/FTE Base pay 741 212 7 249 Bonuses 146 604 1 434 Super gross 1 189 674 11 635 Benefits 131 140 1 283 Total Remuneration 1 320 814 12 917 On-boarding 78 406 767 Fluctuation costs 3 797 37 Total EGSS costs 1 403 017 13 721 Attraction premiums (DP HU) 0 0 Grand total EGSS costs 1 403 017 13 721 Year 2014 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 083 028 7 594 250 309 1 755 1 786 672 12 527 184 729 1 295 1 971 401 13 822 29 113 204 5 216 37 2 005 730 14 063 10 934 77 2 016 664 14 140 2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 219 733 7 869 285 567 1 842 1 993 017 12 858 214 493 1 384 2 207 511 14 242 0 0 5 641 36 2 213 152 14 278 10 934 71 2 224 086 14 349 2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 243 333 8 022 285 645 1 843 2 024 368 13 060 231 453 1 493 2 255 821 14 554 0 0 5 705 37 2 261 526 14 590 10 934 71 2 272 460 14 661 2017 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 264 470 8 158 285 757 1 844 2 052 500 13 242 231 453 1 493 2 283 953 14 735 0 0 5 796 37 2 289 750 14 773 10 934 71 2 300 684 14 843 2018 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 285 966 8 297 285 871 1 844 2 081 112 13 427 231 453 1 493 2 312 565 14 920 0 0 5 890 38 2 318 454 14 958 10 934 71 2 329 389 15 028
1
Positive
2
Most likely
2013 Yearly Yearly Costs structure costs costs/FTE Base pay 741 212 7 249 Bonuses 146 604 1 434 Super gross 1 189 674 11 635 Benefits 131 140 1 283 Total Remuneration 1 320 814 12 917 On-boarding 78 406 767 Fluctuation costs 4 556 45 Total EGSS costs 1 403 776 13 729 Attraction premiums (DP HU) 0 0 Grand total EGSS costs 1 403 776 13 729
2013 Yearly Yearly Costs structure costs costs/FTE Base pay 741 212 7 249 Bonuses 146 604 1 434 Super gross 1 189 674 11 635 Benefits 131 140 1 283 Total Remuneration 1 320 814 12 917 On-boarding 78 406 767 Fluctuation costs 5 316 52 Total EGSS costs 1 404 535 13 736 Attraction premiums (DP HU) 0 0 Grand total EGSS costs 1 404 535 13 736 Year
Year
2014 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 098 332 7 701 250 406 1 756 1 807 310 12 672 184 729 1 295 1 992 039 13 967 29 530 207 6 346 44 2 027 916 14 219 10 934 77 2 038 850 14 295
2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 268 396 8 183 285 826 1 844 2 082 658 13 437 214 493 1 384 2 297 151 14 820 0 0 8 294 54 2 305 445 14 874 10 934 71 2 316 380 14 944
3
Negative
38
* For detailed WF costs development by teams see Appendices WF cost development per teams
Teams: Securities & Treasury (1/3) Staffing plan is the key input into the EGSS workforce cost calculations
Description Securities & Treasury require a professional experience and both German and English language skills to reach the targeted structure Limited availability of the required workforce in the Hodonn region Favorable availability of the required workforce in Brno
Scenario A: Attraction of Professionals from Brno

Hiring the workforce at one level below the targeted structure (mostly at professional level) Employees to be hired from Brno: 20% (mostly A3, P1) Require partly internal hiring from different teams (mainly to Professional levels) Reaching the targeted career structure: 2017 (fully operational)
Hiring from Brno would require additional premium costs (transportation allowance + market premium) of 336 EUR / month / employee
Scenarios: Scenario A: Professionals need to be attracted from Brno Scenario B: Hiring of junior staff in Hodonin and their long-term development Staffing plan Scenario B Scenario A
Team Status / Level A1 A2 A3 P1 P2 TL1 TL2 TL3 sum GL1 GL2 Treasury Securities Grow Grow Hire Hire to to 5 10 21 5 52 10 3 21 8 52 6 3 14 8 6 14 3 3 38 1 1 8 8 92 Team Status / Level A1 A2 A3 P1 P2 TL1 TL2 TL3 sum GL1 GL2 Treasury Securities Grow Grow Hire Hire to to 36 68,5 5 16,5 10 2 21 5 52 3 2 8 6 14
Pros: Shorter time to fully onboard and become fully operational Cons: Higher risk of fluctuation Additional costs on premiums paid to employees from Brno
Scenario B: Long-term junior staff development

Hiring junior workforce with no financial back office experience (A1 and A3 level) mostly available from Hodonn region and their gradual development to the target level Employees to be hired from Brno: 5% (mostly A3, P1) Requires internal hiring from different teams (mostly to A2 positions) Reaching the target career structure: 2019 (fully operational)
3 38 1 1
8 92
Pros: Lower costs on premiums paid to employees from Brno Development of local employees from Hodonn with lower risk of future fluctuation Cons: High on-boarding and development costs (long-term productivity loss and mentoring costs) Time to fully onboard and became fully operational
Group Leaders included in the calculation.

Teams: Securities & Treasury (2/3) EGSS workforce costs development (based on the respective staffing plan)
Scenario A
Scenarios Workforce costs development (EUR)
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 293 719 8 332 0 0 36 480 1 035 0 0 442 467 12 552 0 0 45 656 1 295 0 0 488 123 13 847 0 0 205 578 5 832 0 0 3 762 107 0 0 697 462 19 786 0 0 67 536 1 916 0 0 764 998 21 702 2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 965 966 8 511 187 434 1 651 1 527 101 13 455 157 064 1 384 1 684 166 14 838 169 780 1 496 11 868 105 1 865 813 16 439 202 608 1 785 2 068 421 18 224 2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 251 904 9 484 241 783 1 832 1 977 642 14 982 197 108 1 493 2 174 750 16 475 23 254 176 13 993 106 2 211 997 16 758 210 712 1 596 2 422 709 18 354 2017 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 396 242 10 578 244 413 1 852 2 172 227 16 456 197 108 1 493 2 369 336 17 950 0 0 14 218 108 2 383 553 18 057 140 475 1 064 2 524 028 19 121 2018 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 419 978 10 757 244 537 1 853 2 203 818 16 696 197 108 1 493 2 400 926 18 189 0 0 14 446 109 2 415 372 18 298 86 446 655 2 501 819 18 953
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs Yearly costs
2013 2014 Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 296 198 8 403 0 0 36 480 1 035 0 0 445 789 12 646 0 0 45 656 1 295 0 0 491 445 13 942 0 0 208 506 5 915 0 0 4 577 130 0 0 704 527 19 987 0 0 67 536 1 916 0 0 772 063 21 903
2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 000 452 8 815 187 717 1 654 1 592 146 14 028 157 064 1 384 1 749 210 15 412 178 441 1 572 17 448 154 1 945 099 17 137 202 608 1 785 2 147 707 18 923
2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 019 702 8 984 187 874 1 655 1 618 152 14 257 157 064 1 384 1 775 216 15 641 182 130 1 605 25 431 224 1 982 777 17 469 202 608 1 785 2 185 385 19 254
2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 330 789 10 082 242 238 1 835 2 082 688 15 778 197 108 1 493 2 279 796 17 271 24 654 187 20 765 157 2 325 216 17 615 210 712 1 596 2 535 928 19 212
3
Negative
40
2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 1 584 119 12 001 1 666 493 12 625 245 394 1 859 245 824 1 862 2 451 548 18 572 2 562 506 19 413 197 108 1 493 197 108 1 493 2 648 656 20 066 2 759 614 20 906 0 0 0 0 38 926 295 44 255 335 2 687 582 20 360 2 803 869 21 241 140 475 1 064 86 446 655 2013 Czech Republic 2 828 057 21 425 Deloitte 2 890 315 21 896
Teams: Securities & Treasury (3/3) EGSS workforce costs development (based on the respective staffing plan)
Scenario B
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 244 826 6 945 0 0 36 480 1 035 0 0 376 951 10 694 0 0 45 656 1 295 0 0 422 607 11 989 0 0 205 578 5 832 0 0 3 762 107 0 0 631 946 17 928 0 0 18 910 536 0 0 650 856 18 464 2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 813 465 7 167 187 434 1 651 1 325 190 11 676 157 064 1 384 1 482 255 13 060 169 780 1 496 11 868 105 1 663 902 14 660 37 820 333 1 701 722 14 993 2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 084 657 8 217 244 291 1 851 1 759 527 13 330 197 108 1 493 1 956 636 14 823 0 0 13 993 106 1 970 629 14 929 54 029 409 2 024 658 15 338 2017 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 193 230 9 040 244 413 1 852 1 903 439 14 420 197 108 1 493 2 100 548 15 913 0 0 14 218 108 2 114 765 16 021 37 820 287 2 152 586 16 307 2018 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 1 293 421 9 799 244 537 1 853 2 036 256 15 426 197 108 1 493 2 233 364 16 919 0 0 14 446 109 2 247 810 17 029 27 014 205 2 274 825 17 234
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2013 2014 Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 246 893 7 004 0 0 36 480 1 035 0 0 379 720 10 772 0 0 45 656 1 295 0 0 425 376 12 067 0 0 208 506 5 915 0 0 4 577 130 0 0 638 458 18 112 0 0 18 910 536 0 0 657 368 18 649
3
Negative
41
2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 1 353 790 10 256 1 517 965 11 500 245 394 1 859 245 824 1 862 2 142 907 16 234 2 363 478 17 905 197 108 1 493 197 108 1 493 2 340 015 17 727 2 560 586 19 398 0 0 0 0 38 926 295 44 255 335 2 378 941 18 022 2 604 841 19 734 37 820 287 27 014 205 2013 Czech Republic 2 416 761 18 309 Deloitte 2 631 855 19 938
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI. VII.

I. II. Appendix 1-10 WF Cost Development per Teams
42
Appendix 1 Unemployment rate in the CR regional overview
Unemployment rate in the CR regional overview as at December 2012
SM region 10,42% SM region 10,42%
Source: S
43
Appendix 2 Definition of the closest targeted region

Internal analysis current state of EGSS WF mobility
Town
Closest targeted region for external analysis

District Region State
Cca 30-40 km range
All towns Hodonn Beclav Beclav Lanhot Beclav Moravsk Nov Ves Beclav Moravsk ikov Beclav Vrbice Beclav Brumovice Beclav Kobyll Beclav Hruky Beclav Ladn Beclav Velk Blovice Beclav Tnec Beclav Tvrdonice Beclav Boetice Beclav Kostice Beclav Nemiky Beclav Kostelany nad Moravou Uhersk Hradit
Vany Oechov Buchlovice Nekadonice Poleovice Ostrosk Nov Ves Uhersk Ostroh Ostrosk Lhota All towns (Holic, Gbely, Skalica) Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit Uhersk Hradit
Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Jihomoravsk kraj Zlnsky kraj
Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj Zlnsky kraj
R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R
Range # emp. Areas 0 km 19 Hodonn Hol, Rohatec, Doln Bojanovice, < 10 km 20 Mikulice, Ratkovice, Dubany, Josefov Mutnice, Moravsk Nov Ves, Skalica, Svatoboice, Strnice, Vlko, Vracov, < 20 km 20 Moravsk ikov, Strnice, Hovorany, Kyjov Beclav, Lanhot, Soblky, Vnorovy, < 30 km 10 Kndub, eravice Uhersk Ostroh, Nmiky, Buchlovice, > 30 km 4 Brezov pod Bradlom
Skalica, Senica
Trnavsk kraj
SR
For definition of closest targeted region for external analysis we used internal analysis as the start point. Then we extended it for more towns in range of 30-40 km.
44
Appendix 3 Transport infrastructure

Geographical map of the South Moravian Region
state border region line county line road and motorway network (source: RMD Ostrava) motorway express way class I roads class II roads railway network national railway regional railway hydrologic unit rivers highest point in the region
Municipalities with town status based on population size (updated December 31, 2011
<= 2 000 2001 5000 5001 10 000 10 001 50 000 > 50 000
elevation levels (m)
Source: Internet
45
Appendix 4 Secondary shools overview in Hodonn and Beclav district

Hodonn
Secondary school
Gymnzium, Obchodn akademie a Jazykov kola s prvem sttn jazykov zkouky Hodonn Integrovan stedn kola, Hodonn, Lipov alej 21
Beclav
Relevance to EGSS
high probability to continue studying at University directly in Hodonnn, also economic specialization
Town
Hodonn
Secondary school
Gymnzium T. G. Masaryka, Hustopee, Dukelsk nmst 7 Gymnzium a Jazykov kola s prvem sttn jazykov zkouky, Beclav, sady 28.jna 1 Gymnzium, Stedn odborn kola a Stedn odborn uilit, Mikulov, Komenskho 7
Town
Hustopee
Relevance to EGSS
Hodonn
Beclav
Klvaovo gymnzium a Stedn odborn kola zdravotnick a sociln Kyjov Obchodn akademie a Jazykov kola s prvem sttn jazykov zkouky, Hodonn, Velkomoravsk 13 Obchodn akademie a Stedn odborn uilit Vesel nad Moravou
Kyjov
Mikulov
Hodonn
directly in Hodonnn, economic specialization
Gymnzium, Velk Pavlovice, Pod kolou 10, pspvkov organizace
Velk Pavlovice
Vesel nad Moravou
good connection, economic specialization
HOTELOV KOLA MIKULOV, spol. s r.o. Mstsk stedn odborn kola, Klobouky u Brna, nm. Mru 6, pspvkov organiz Mstsk vcelet gymnzium Klobouky u Brna, Vinask 29
Sedlec u Mikulova 101
Purkyovo gymnzium, Strnice, Masarykova 379 Stedn odborn kola a Stedn odborn uilit automobiln, Kyjov, Ndran 471 Stedn odborn kola obchodu, slueb a provozu hotel a st
Strnice
Klobouky u Brna
Kyjov
Klobouky u Brna
Strnice
Obchodn akademie, Beclav, Smetanovo nbe 17
Beclav
Stedn odborn kola zdravotnick a sociln, Kyjov, Komenskho 46
Kyjov
Soukrom stedn odborn kola Beclav , s.r.o.
Beclav
Stedn odborn kola, Strnice, Skcelova 890
Strnice
Soukrom stedn odborn kola manaersk a zdravotnick s.r.o. Stedn odborn kola a Stedn odborn uilit, Hustopee, Masarykovo nm. 1 Stedn odborn kola vinask a Stedn odborn uilit zahradnick, Valtice, Sobotn 116 directly in Hodonnn, not economic specialization Stedn prmyslov kola Edvarda Benee a Obchodn akademie Beclav
Beclav
Stedn kola Strnice
Strnice
Hustopee
Stedn kola gastronomie, hotelnictv a lesnictv Bzenec
Bzenec
Valtice
Stedn kola prmyslov a umleck, Hodonn, Brandlova 32
Hodonn
Beclav
46
Appendix 5 Universities overview in South Moravia

South Moravia Region + Zln
Relevant faculty for EGSS - Faculty of Economics and Administration Masaryk University in Brno - Faculty of Socail (MUNI) Studies University - Faculty of Business and Economics Mendel University in Brno - Faculty of Regional Development and International Studies Tomas Bata University in Zln Brno University of Technology (VUT) Private College of Economic Studies in Znojmo College of Business and Hotel Management Brno International Business school - Faculty of Business and Management - Faculty of Business and Management - Private college with economic specialization - Private college, no economic specialization - Private college with economic specialization - Private college with management specialization - Private college with economic specialization - Private college with economic specialization Nr. of gradutes (ca.average) Relevance to EGSS
800
200
Cooperation with Masaryk University in Brno seems to be the most advantageus for EGSS highest number of gradutes, cooperation with leading companies is already established (eg. with Raiffeisn) Interships followed by full-time position offer can be wnat of the ways of cooperation as theyare highly appreciated by students see next slide. We included also Tomas Bata University in Zln which is part of Zln region but still close to Hodonn (ca. 1 hour by bus)
100
100 100
80
80
Newton College, Brno
80
Ran College, Brno
n/a
Karel Englis College
n/a
Almost 25 ths. student with English language and ca. 4 ths. with German language skills
47
Appendix 6 Comparison of Income Tax Payments in 2013 vs. 2015

Example for an employee with a monthly income of CZK 16 000 (annual figures in CZK)
Employee Gross wage - Employee insurance contribution - Income tax Net wage 2013 192 000 21 120 2015 192 000 24 960
Example for an employee with a monthly income of CZK 25 000 (annual figures in CZK)
Employee 2013
300 000
33 000
2015
300 000
39 000
Gross wage
- Employee insurance contribution - Income tax Net wage
13 740 157 140
11 640 155 400
35 460 231 540
32 160 228 840
Employer Gross wage + Employer insurance contribution (aggregate payroll tax) Employer costs
2013 192 000 65 280
2015 192 000 62 208
Employer Gross wage + Employer insurance contribution (aggregate payroll tax) Employer costs
2013
300 000 102 000
2015
300 000 97 200
257 280
254 208
402 000
397 200
When compared to 2013, in 2015:

The real employee income will decrease by CZK 1 740 The costs incurred by employers will be reduced by CZK 3 072
When compared to 2013, in 2015:

The real employee income will decrease by CZK 2 700 The costs incurred by employers will be reduced by CZK 4 800
48
Appendix 7 Overview of brownfields in Hodonn district
1 300 brownfields in the SM region in total. Most brownfields come from industry and agriculture (40% and 35%), which is about 7% higher share than national level (33.3% and 34.9%)
Source: Internet
19 brownfields in the vicinity of the Hodonn district wich could be used for new investments
Legend:
B= 1 brownfield 2= 2 brownfileds 3= 3 brownfields

49
Appendix 8 Selected results of First Steps on the Labour Market surveys done by Deloitte internship and their appreciation by students
Source: First Steps on the Labour Market Survey , Deloitte, 2013
78% 78%
Acquired work experience and how students consider it useful

47% 33% 32% 26% 23% 11% 21% 10% 25%
55% 15%
48%
18 44% 30% 28% 25%
18%
8% 8% 7% 2% They have such experience They consider it useful
16%
2 15%
10%
78% of young people are very interested in experiences related to the field of study, but only 48% of them have this experience On the other hand temporary jobs have 55% of respondents experience, but only 15% consider them useful for the future career
34% of the respondents who gained professional experience during their studies do not explicitly consider their experience as useful in their professional development regardless of their field of study
Employers and universities should continue providing more practical opportunities: students want to work in the field of study and value this experience high and useful
Appendix 8 Selected results of First Steps on the Labour Market surveys done by Deloitte Mobility (1/2)
Willingness to move to another city is high across all regions 72% of respondents from the students and graduates are willing to relocate for better job offers in other cities in the Czech Republic in SM region, this percentage is even higher (82%)
Willingness to move to another city by regions

20% 39% 40% 37% 48% 25% 13% 29% 50% 67% 28% 60% 33% 34% 19% 21% 8% 6% 5% 2% 13% 4% 2% 20% 0% 0% 4% 24% 6% 0% 13% 0% 0% 0% 17% 4% 0% 30% 50% 71% 29% 16% 7% 7% 45% 0% 33% 0% 0% 31% 25% 46%
15% 0% 8%
Prague, the Capital
MoravianSilesian region
South Moravian region
Liberec region
Plze Region
Central Bohemian region
Zln region
Olomouc region
South Bohemian region
Vysoina region
Pardubice region
Yes
Somewhat Yes
Somewhat No
No
I do not know
*students in the survey signed up to the region according to place of study 51 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
Appendix 7 Selected results of First Steps on the Labour Market surveys done by Deloitte Mobility (2/2)
Willingness to move to another city by field of study

Yes Somewhat Yes 40% Somewhat No 44% No I do not know
41%
38%
26%
34%
22% 35%
19% 16% 6% 4% 17% 3% 5%
22%
9% 9%
5% 7%
74% of students in economics field of study is willing to relocate for a better job offer in another city willingness to move is lower for students in technical fields, but in their case it is willing to change residence because of a job offer more than 50% of them
Economic field of study
Business Administration
Technical Social Sciences fiield of study
52
Appendix 8 EGSS vs. Czech market vs. Slovak market compensation comparison (benchmarking)
14,000 Level
Base pay: EGSS vs. SK market vs. CZ market

38,377 41,400 45,100 41,725
EGSS Slovakia blue shadows Czech Republic green shadows
TL 2 46,000 41,658
missing data missing data Most relevant regions for remuneration benchmarking are Trencin & Trnava (FSI) for Slovakia and SM Region (FSI) for the Czech Republic. Benchmarks for all EGSS levels are closer to Slovak base pay salaries as to Czech ones, but still under the market across levels. Looking at other regions, differences go even higher.
47,515 53,545 51,500
25,848 30,198 31,000 34,600 35,975 35,073 35,500 35,181 38,244 41,563 40,700
TL 1
missing data
BOF 2
BOF 1
19,141 20,373 21,000 22,732 25,583 25,000 19,140 27,000 23,750 25,865 26,925 Comparison of similar 30,007 markets in Slovakia and 15,061 Czech republic shows 16,475 that wages in Slovakia 19,320 20,500 are in general lower 22,550 20,300 than in Czech Republic 23,740 23,000 19,452 20,550 24,425 25,538 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000
EGSS
FSI, selected regions
Trencin and Trnava Region, FSI SM Region, FSI BRNO Region, FSI SK Region, All industries, Admin support Trencin and Trnava Region, All industries, Admin support SM Region, All industries, Admin support
Admin
BRNO Region, All industries, Admin support

Trnava Region, All industries, All SK Region, FSI FSI, whole country Czech Republic Region, FSI Czech Republic Region, FSI, just admin support
Monthly salary (CZK) 50,000 55,000
Source: Deloitte 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
53
14,000 Level
Total cash (including actual paid bonuses): EGSS vs. SK market vs. CZ market
45,183 49,411
TL 2
54,215 47,608 missing data missing data 58,428 46,850 55,760 62,606 62,400 29,582 37,992 36,333 40,483 39,644 39,644 40,552 42,490 23,026 25,863 24,936 26,522 27,963 27,375 22,468 32,820 27,823 28,242 30,757 35,050 17,180 19,967 20,819 22,007 24,900 24,196 26,225 28,694 23,648 23,275 27,522 29,005
TL 1
missing data 51,700 48,263 48,280
The gap between EGSS and market salaries is even bigger at a total cash level (base salary + actual bonuses paid), i.e. not only base salaries, but also bonuses are lower in EGSS comparing to the market. Interestingly, Trencin and Trnava region has higher total cash as SM region in TL1 and BOF 2 levles which is due to higher actual paid bonuses.
EGSS
BOF 2
Admin

BOF 1
Monthly salary (CZK) 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 55,000 60,000 65,000
Source: Deloitte 54 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
14,000 Level 52,404 52,331 56,113
Total cash (including target bonuses): EGSS vs. SK market vs. CZ market
TL 2
47,735 missing data missing data 57,500 51,158 56,290 64,661 62,838 28,888 41,142 40,300 42,340 42,127 40,819 38,866 41,823 43,908
Similar situation is from total cash with targeted bonuses point of view where the difference to both markets even grows.
TL 1
missing data
48,159 50,820 EGSS
BOF 2
22,941 25,542 26,072 28,210 29,338 28,810 28,527 30,240 28,125 29,892 32,016 35,596 17,919 21,465 22,123 24,567 25,319 24,600 28,079 25,828 23,852 23,881 28,162 28,969
Admin

BOF 1
Monthly salary (CZK) 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 55,000 60,000 65,000
Source: Deloitte 55 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
Benefits: EGSS vs. SK market vs. CZ market
Level 3,048 3,171 TL 2 2,996 2,813 3,925 6,452 5,000 2,854 2,602 2,440 2,500 2,854 missing data missing data missing data missing data 4,772 5,000 missing data EGSS Benefits in Slovakia are in general lower than in the Czech Republic
missing data missing data missing data missing data
TL 1
Data for ERSTE missing
2,302
7,432
BOF 2
1,602 1,309 1,627
2,302 2,198 2,298 2,397 2,158 missing data
4,065 Admin

BOF 1
2,065 1,775 2,312 1,931 2,027
3,904
2,996
4,495
Monthly salary (CZK) 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 7,500
3,596
Source: Deloitte
56
Appendix 8 Benchmarking with public available statistics

As another source of benchmarking for the Czech market we also used regular statistical monitoring of wages published by Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (2012 results). From 2011, these results comprises a whole employed population in the Czech Republic, so they are more representative. Research is obligatory for all employers which have more than 250 employees and employers which have between 10-249 are selected by random choice and then extrapolated. For Slovakia, we used statistical data from regional database of Statistical Office of Slovak Republic (2011 data). Methodology is similar to Czech monitoring, survey is compulsory for all companies employing more than 20 employees. For recalculation to Czech Crowns we used exchange rate 25 CZK/EUR.
EGSS vs. All Czech Republic vs. SM Region vs. Skalica & Senica district
Base pay*
18,534 Level Czech Republic EGSS SM region Skalica district Senica district Tranava region 0 5,000 9,400 15,975 Monthly salary (CZK) 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Wages for Senica district are much lower than in SM region / Czech republic but in general, Slovak wages are lower on base pay level. 18,907 22,310 25,512 18,888 20,017 -0.09% 15,506 20,035 20,587 missing data 15,275 EGSS 23,263 18,758 Level Czech Republic 19,022 19,212 22,558 25,644
Total cash*
21,905
SM region
5,000
Monthly salary (CZK) 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
23,782 24,903 missing data
EGSS average across levles 4110 - General admin workers 4222 - Workers in customer contact centers 4312 - Admin workers in statistic, finance and insurance 4132 - Data entry admin workers Lowers admin and support positions 57
Source: Deloitte * Base pay consits of gorss salary without premiums, allowances and bonuses, Total cash consists of base pay + bonuses 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
Appendix 9 Overview of major employers in Hodonn district

Company SAD Hodonn a.s. Jednota, spotebn drustvo v Hodonn Jihomoravsk armaturka spol. s r.o. Nemocnice TGM Hodonn, pspvkov organizace TPK, spol. s r.o. The Candy Plus Sweet Factory, s.r.o. DELIMAX, a.s. Lignit Hodonn, s.r.o. Msto HODONN MND a.s. MND Drilling & Services a.s. Okna Macek s.r.o. roubrna Kyjov, spol. s r.o. T Machinery a.s. Vodovody a kanalizace Hodonn, a.s. Lzn Hodonn DYAS, spol. s r.o. DYAS.EU, a.s. KM Beta a.s. LUTO Automotive CZ, s.r.o. TVARBET MORAVIA, a.s. Integrovan stedn kola, Hodonn, Lipov alej 21 Town Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Rohatec Hodonn Mikulice Hodonn Hodonn Luice Dubany Hodonn Ratkovice Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Motor cargo Retail (food, beverages, tobacco) Manufacturing (industrial fittings) Health care (hospital) Food processing (milk and cheese) Food processing (cocoa, chocolate, candy) Food processing Brown coal mining Public administration Petroleum drilling / extraction Petroleum drilling support Joinery Fittings Manufacturing of mining and drilling machinery Water distribution Health care (spa) Boards and veneers manufacturing Boards and veneers manufacturing Concrete manufacturing Employment agency Manufacturing of masonry and paving stones High school Area of specialization Number of employees 500 - 999 500 - 999 500 - 999 500 - 999 500 - 999 500 - 999 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 250 - 499 200 - 249 200 - 249 200 - 249 200 - 249 200 - 249 100 - 199 100 - 199
Kornfeil spol. s r.o.

LISI AUTOMOTIVE FORM a.s. Mart s.r.o. OMNIKA, spol. s r.o. Pozemn stavitelstv Hodonn, spol. s r.o. S - centrum Hodonn, pspvkov organizace TESPRA Hodonn, s.r.o. Woodline CZ s.r.o. Zemdlsk a.s. ejkovice PETRA spol. s r.o. Source: Internet 58
ej
ej Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn Hodonn ejkovice Hodonn
Manufacturing of food processing machinery

Forging and powder metallurgy Manufacturing of cooling and air-conditioning appliances Manufacturing of metal-working products Construction of residential and non-residential buildings Social care retirement homes Waste collection and disposal Saw manufacturing and wood impregnation Mixed economy (agriculture) Lumbering
100 - 199
100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199 100 - 199
Appendix 10 Overview of admin/back office/customer support companies in SM region
Company STUDENT AGENCY, s.r.o. Global Tele Sales Brno s.r.o. Mediaservis - Zkaznick Centrum ABB s.r.o., Brno IBM Global Services Delivery Center Czech Republic, s.r.o., Brno Honeywell, s.r.o., Brno
Nr. of emloyees 1000 - 1499 250 - 499 250 (?) 3200 3000 - 3999 2000
Activity sector back office, call centre call centre of Lufthansa call centrum, promo, telemarketing SSC - customer support infocomm activities infocomm activities Brno Brno Brno Brno Brno Brno
Town
Proveon Customer Services s.r.o.
100 (?)
outsourcing of complex customer processes and services connected with the operation, Brno management and development of customer service centers
Home Credit a.s. PPG Industries Czech Republic s.r.o AT & T Global Network Services Czech Republic s.r.o. Infosys BPO s.r.o.
500 - 999 250 - 499 250 - 499 500 - 999
operators positions (for absolvents) SSC - acconting services telecommunication, support customer support, foregin languages
Brno Brno Brno Brno
Motorola Solutions CZ
ATENTO, s.r.o. Amax s.r.o. Quality Brands, s.r.o.
250 - 499
500 - 999 50 - 100 200 - 250
customer support, foregin languages

zkaznick servis, call centra customer support, call centre customer support, call centre
Brno
Brno Brno, Hodonn Brno, Olomouc
Source: Internet
59
Table of Contents
I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI. VII.

I. II. Appendix 1-10 WF Cost Development per Teams
60
EGSS workforce costs development (1/6) Teams: Current EGSS teams

Teams: International payments holding, International payments CS, Foreign cheques, Investigation holding, Domestic Payments CS
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs 2013 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 586 652 7 379 125 856 1 583 954 761 12 010 101 963 1 283 1 056 723 13 292 43 043 541 2 999 38 1 102 765 13 871 0 0 1 102 765 13 871 2014 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 624 859 7 860 145 008 1 824 1 031 622 12 976 102 969 1 295 1 134 591 14 272 0 0 3 041 38 1 137 632 14 310 0 0 1 137 632 14 310 2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 651 390 8 194 145 008 1 824 1 054 431 13 263 110 014 1 384 1 164 445 14 647 0 0 3 033 38 1 167 478 14 685 0 0 1 167 478 14 685 2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 659 206 8 292 145 008 1 824 1 064 780 13 393 118 713 1 493 1 183 493 14 887 0 0 3 068 39 1 186 561 14 925 0 0 1 186 561 14 925 2017 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 670 413 8 433 145 008 1 824 1 079 617 13 580 118 713 1 493 1 198 330 15 073 0 0 3 117 39 1 201 447 15 113 0 0 1 201 447 15 113 2018 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 681 810 8 576 145 008 1 824 1 094 707 13 770 118 713 1 493 1 213 420 15 263 0 0 3 167 40 1 216 587 15 303 0 0 1 216 587 15 303
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs
2013 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 586 652 7 379 125 856 1 583 954 761 12 010 101 963 1 283 1 056 723 13 292 43 043 541 3 599 45 1 103 365 13 879 0 0 1 103 365 13 879
3
Negative
61
2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 760 623 9 568 800 175 10 065 145 008 1 824 145 008 1 824 1 213 546 15 265 1 266 546 15 931 118 713 1 493 118 713 1 493 1 332 259 16 758 1 385 259 17 425 0 0 0 0 8 534 107 9 702 122 1 340 792 16 865 1 394 961 17 547 0 0 0 0 2013 Czech Republic 1 340 792 16 865 Deloitte 1 394 961 17 547
EGSS workforce costs development (2/6) Teams: Domestic Payments Hungary
Scenarios
Workforce costs development (EUR)

Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 73 080 6 798 150 545 7 002 160 908 7 484 162 838 7 574 165 607 7 703 168 422 7 834 9 804 912 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 111 065 10 332 254 279 11 827 264 964 12 324 267 520 12 443 271 185 12 613 274 913 12 787 13 787 1 283 27 847 1 295 29 752 1 384 32 105 1 493 32 105 1 493 32 105 1 493 124 852 11 614 282 126 13 122 294 716 13 708 299 625 13 936 303 290 14 107 307 017 14 280 16 710 1 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 377 35 765 36 763 35 771 36 784 36 796 37 141 939 13 204 282 891 13 158 295 479 13 743 300 396 13 972 304 074 14 143 307 814 14 317 0 0 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 141 939 13 204 293 826 13 666 306 413 14 252 311 331 14 480 315 008 14 652 318 748 14 826
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 73 080 6 798 152 770 7 106 167 327 7 783 173 184 8 055 179 245 8 337 185 519 8 629 9 804 912 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 111 065 10 332 257 261 11 966 276 768 12 873 281 217 13 080 289 242 13 453 297 549 13 839 13 787 1 283 27 847 1 295 29 752 1 384 32 105 1 493 32 105 1 493 32 105 1 493 124 852 11 614 285 108 13 261 306 520 14 257 313 322 14 573 321 347 14 946 329 653 15 333 16 710 1 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 452 42 931 43 1 121 52 1 145 53 1 352 63 1 397 65 142 014 13 211 286 038 13 304 307 642 14 309 314 467 14 626 322 699 15 009 331 050 15 398 0 0 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 142 014 13 211 296 973 13 813 318 576 14 817 325 401 15 135 333 633 15 518 341 984 15 906
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 73 080 6 798 154 253 7 175 170 911 7 949 178 943 8 323 187 891 8 739 197 661 9 194 9 804 912 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 39 216 1 824 111 065 10 332 259 248 12 058 281 570 13 096 292 334 13 597 304 323 14 155 317 415 14 763 13 787 1 283 27 847 1 295 29 752 1 384 32 105 1 493 32 105 1 493 32 105 1 493 124 852 11 614 287 095 13 353 311 322 14 480 324 438 15 090 336 428 15 648 349 520 16 257 16 710 1 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 528 49 1 409 66 1 635 76 1 878 87 2 146 100 2 440 113 142 090 13 218 288 504 13 419 312 956 14 556 326 316 15 178 338 573 15 748 351 959 16 370 0 0 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 10 934 509 2013 Czech Republic 142 090 13 218 299 438 13 927 323 891 15 065 337 251 15 686 349 508 16 256 Deloitte 362 894 16 879
3
Negative
62
EGSS workforce costs development (3/6) Teams: Domestic Payments Slovakia
Scenarios

Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 81 480 6 790 167 597 6 983 178 130 7 422 180 268 7 511 183 332 7 639 186 449 7 769 10 944 912 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 123 848 10 321 283 240 11 802 293 804 12 242 296 634 12 360 300 691 12 529 304 818 12 701 15 391 1 283 31 085 1 295 33 212 1 384 35 838 1 493 35 838 1 493 35 838 1 493 139 239 11 603 314 325 13 097 327 015 13 626 332 472 13 853 336 529 14 022 340 656 14 194 18 653 1 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 421 35 854 36 851 35 861 36 875 36 889 37 158 312 13 193 315 178 13 132 327 867 13 661 333 333 13 889 337 404 14 059 341 545 14 231 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 312 13 193 315 178 13 132 327 867 13 661 333 333 13 889 337 404 14 059 341 545 14 231
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 81 480 6 790 170 074 7 086 185 237 7 718 191 720 7 988 198 430 8 268 205 375 8 557 10 944 912 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 123 848 10 321 286 558 11 940 306 877 12 787 311 797 12 992 320 681 13 362 329 876 13 745 15 391 1 283 31 085 1 295 33 212 1 384 35 838 1 493 35 838 1 493 35 838 1 493 139 239 11 603 317 643 13 235 340 089 14 170 347 635 14 485 356 519 14 855 365 714 15 238 18 653 1 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 505 42 1 039 43 1 252 52 1 278 53 1 509 63 1 559 65 158 397 13 200 318 682 13 278 341 341 14 223 348 913 14 538 358 028 14 918 367 273 15 303 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158 397 13 200 318 682 13 278 341 341 14 223 348 913 14 538 358 028 14 918 367 273 15 303
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 81 480 6 790 171 725 7 155 189 204 7 883 198 096 8 254 208 001 8 667 218 817 9 117 10 944 912 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 43 776 1 824 123 848 10 321 288 771 12 032 312 193 13 008 324 109 13 505 337 381 14 058 351 875 14 661 15 391 1 283 31 085 1 295 33 212 1 384 35 838 1 493 35 838 1 493 35 838 1 493 139 239 11 603 319 856 13 327 345 405 14 392 359 947 14 998 373 219 15 551 387 713 16 155 18 653 1 554 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 589 49 1 572 66 1 825 76 2 096 87 2 395 100 2 723 113 158 481 13 207 321 428 13 393 347 229 14 468 362 043 15 085 375 615 15 651 390 436 16 268 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 Czech Republic 158 481 13 207 321 428 13 393 347 229 14 468 362 043 15 085 375 615 15 651 Deloitte 390 436 16 268
3
Negative
63
EGSS workforce costs development (4/6) Teams: Domestic Payments Austria
Scenarios

Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 107 142 6 857 196 829 7 030 208 154 7 434 211 693 7 560 215 292 7 689 0 0 15 732 1 007 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 0 0 164 651 10 538 328 221 11 722 343 216 12 258 347 901 12 425 352 666 12 595 0 0 20 238 1 295 38 747 1 384 41 811 1 493 41 811 1 493 41 811 1 493 0 0 184 889 11 833 366 968 13 106 385 027 13 751 389 712 13 918 394 476 14 088 0 0 29 113 1 863 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 556 36 993 35 1 005 36 1 021 36 1 037 37 0 0 214 557 13 732 367 961 13 141 386 031 13 787 390 732 13 955 395 514 14 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 214 557 13 732 367 961 13 141 386 031 13 787 390 732 13 955 395 514 14 125
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 108 024 6 914 204 682 7 310 221 379 7 906 229 127 8 183 237 146 8 470 0 0 15 732 1 007 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 0 0 165 833 10 613 342 710 12 240 360 724 12 883 370 983 13 249 381 601 13 629 0 0 20 238 1 295 38 747 1 384 41 811 1 493 41 811 1 493 41 811 1 493 0 0 186 071 11 909 381 457 13 623 402 535 14 376 412 794 14 743 423 412 15 122 0 0 29 530 1 890 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 676 43 1 461 52 1 491 53 1 760 63 1 819 65 0 0 216 277 13 842 382 918 13 676 404 026 14 430 414 554 14 806 425 231 15 187 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 216 277 13 842 382 918 13 676 404 026 14 430 414 554 14 806 425 231 15 187
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 108 612 6 951 209 065 7 467 228 741 8 169 240 178 8 578 252 667 9 024 0 0 15 732 1 007 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 51 072 1 824 0 0 166 621 10 664 348 584 12 449 374 950 13 391 390 275 13 938 407 011 14 536 0 0 20 238 1 295 38 747 1 384 41 811 1 493 41 811 1 493 41 811 1 493 0 0 186 859 11 959 387 331 13 833 416 760 14 884 432 086 15 432 448 822 16 029 0 0 29 809 1 908 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 024 66 2 129 76 2 446 87 2 795 100 3 177 113 0 0 217 691 13 932 389 459 13 909 419 206 14 972 434 881 15 531 451 999 16 143 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 Czech Republic 0 0 217 691 13 932 389 459 13 909 419 206 14 972 434 881 15 531 Deloitte 451 999 16 143
3
Negative
64
EGSS workforce costs development (5/6) Teams: Treasury (1/2)

Scenario A
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 57 911 8 579 315 185 8 294 320 199 8 426 412 224 10 848 419 232 11 032 0 0 6 156 912 58 140 1 530 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 0 0 85 850 12 719 494 282 13 007 515 713 13 571 637 554 16 778 646 833 17 022 0 0 8 743 1 295 52 585 1 384 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 0 0 94 593 14 014 546 867 14 391 572 456 15 065 694 298 18 271 703 576 18 515 0 0 45 497 6 740 82 368 2 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 720 107 4 045 106 4 090 108 4 156 109 4 223 111 0 0 140 810 20 861 633 280 16 665 576 546 15 172 698 454 18 380 707 799 18 626 0 0 20 261 3 002 89 148 2 346 86 446 2 275 54 029 1 422 32 417 853 0 0 161 070 23 862 722 428 19 011 662 992 17 447 752 482 19 802 740 216 19 479
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 58 342 8 643 325 828 8 574 340 542 8 962 446 173 11 741 461 789 12 152 0 0 6 156 912 58 140 1 530 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 0 0 86 428 12 804 514 516 13 540 542 646 14 280 682 502 17 961 703 178 18 505 0 0 8 743 1 295 52 585 1 384 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 0 0 95 170 14 099 567 102 14 924 599 389 15 773 739 245 19 454 759 921 19 998 0 0 46 145 6 836 86 570 2 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 876 130 5 946 156 6 070 160 7 167 189 7 405 195 0 0 142 191 21 065 659 619 17 358 605 459 15 933 746 412 19 642 767 326 20 193 0 0 20 261 3 002 89 148 2 346 86 446 2 275 54 029 1 422 32 417 853 0 0 162 452 24 067 748 766 19 704 691 905 18 208 800 441 21 064 799 743 21 046
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 58 630 8 686 331 768 8 731 351 867 9 260 467 693 12 308 492 013 12 948 0 0 6 156 912 58 140 1 530 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 0 0 86 813 12 861 522 477 13 749 564 380 14 852 719 587 18 936 752 175 19 794 0 0 8 743 1 295 52 585 1 384 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 0 0 95 555 14 156 575 063 15 133 621 124 16 345 776 330 20 430 808 919 21 287 0 0 46 577 6 900 88 360 2 325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 327 197 8 667 228 9 958 262 11 378 299 12 936 340 0 0 143 459 21 253 672 090 17 687 631 081 16 607 787 708 20 729 821 855 21 628 0 0 20 261 3 002 89 148 2 346 86 446 2 275 54 029 1 422 32 417 853 2013 Czech Republic 0 0 163 720 24 255 761 237 20 033 717 527 18 882 841 737 22 151 Deloitte 854 272 22 481
3
Negative
65
EGSS workforce costs development (5/6) Teams: Treasury (2/2)

Scenario B
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 46 547 6 896 264 181 6 952 314 223 8 269 338 005 8 895 380 168 10 004 0 0 6 156 912 58 140 1 530 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 0 0 70 621 10 462 426 753 11 230 507 801 13 363 539 287 14 192 595 111 15 661 0 0 8 743 1 295 52 585 1 384 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 0 0 79 364 11 758 479 339 12 614 564 544 14 856 596 031 15 685 651 854 17 154 0 0 45 497 6 740 82 368 2 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 720 107 4 045 106 4 090 108 4 156 109 4 223 111 0 0 125 581 18 605 565 752 14 888 568 635 14 964 600 187 15 794 656 077 17 265 0 0 2 701 400 10 806 284 16 209 427 10 806 284 5 403 142 0 0 128 282 19 005 576 557 15 173 584 843 15 391 610 992 16 079 661 480 17 407
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 46 893 6 947 273 062 7 186 334 186 8 794 365 841 9 627 418 759 11 020 0 0 6 156 912 58 140 1 530 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 0 0 71 086 10 531 443 811 11 679 534 232 14 059 576 142 15 162 646 206 17 005 0 0 8 743 1 295 52 585 1 384 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 0 0 79 828 11 826 496 396 13 063 590 975 15 552 632 886 16 655 702 949 18 499 0 0 46 145 6 836 86 570 2 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 876 130 5 946 156 6 070 160 7 167 189 7 405 195 0 0 126 849 18 793 588 913 15 498 597 045 15 712 640 053 16 843 710 354 18 694 0 0 2 701 400 10 806 284 16 209 427 10 806 284 5 403 142 0 0 129 551 19 193 599 719 15 782 613 253 16 138 650 858 17 128 715 757 18 836
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 47 124 6 981 278 019 7 316 345 301 9 087 383 486 10 092 446 167 11 741 0 0 6 156 912 58 140 1 530 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 69 312 1 824 0 0 71 395 10 577 450 454 11 854 555 581 14 621 606 750 15 967 690 741 18 177 0 0 8 743 1 295 52 585 1 384 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 56 743 1 493 0 0 80 138 11 872 503 039 13 238 612 324 16 114 663 493 17 460 747 485 19 671 0 0 46 577 6 900 88 360 2 325 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 327 197 8 667 228 9 958 262 11 378 299 12 936 340 0 0 128 041 18 969 600 066 15 791 622 282 16 376 674 871 17 760 760 421 20 011 0 0 2 701 400 10 806 284 16 209 427 10 806 284 5 403 142 2013 Czech Republic 0 0 130 743 19 369 610 872 16 076 638 491 16 802 685 677 18 044 Deloitte 765 823 20 153
3
Negative
66
EGSS workforce costs development (6/6) Teams: Securities (1/2)

Scenario A
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 235 808 8 274 0 0 30 324 1 064 0 0 356 617 12 513 0 0 36 913 1 295 0 0 393 530 13 808 0 0 160 081 5 617 0 0 3 041 107 0 0 556 653 19 532 0 0 47 275 1 659 0 0 603 928 21 190 2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 615 352 8 372 122 208 1 663 976 530 13 286 101 711 1 384 1 078 241 14 670 87 411 1 189 7 823 106 1 173 476 15 966 113 460 1 544 1 286 936 17 509 2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 895 851 9 738 165 300 1 797 1 404 964 15 271 137 379 1 493 1 542 342 16 765 23 254 253 9 903 108 1 575 499 17 125 124 266 1 351 1 699 765 18 476 2017 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 947 554 10 299 167 808 1 824 1 476 739 16 052 137 379 1 493 1 614 118 17 545 0 0 10 062 109 1 624 180 17 654 86 446 940 1 710 626 18 594 2018 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 963 662 10 475 167 808 1 824 1 498 067 16 283 137 379 1 493 1 635 445 17 777 0 0 10 223 111 1 645 669 17 888 54 029 587 1 699 697 18 475
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
3
Negative
67
2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 1 075 056 11 685 1 130 959 12 293 167 808 1 824 167 808 1 824 1 665 438 18 103 1 740 347 18 917 137 379 1 493 137 379 1 493 1 802 816 19 596 1 877 726 20 410 0 0 0 0 27 547 299 31 319 340 1 830 363 19 895 1 909 045 20 750 86 446 940 54 029 587 2013 Czech Republic 1 916 810 20 835 Deloitte 1 963 074 21 338
EGSS workforce costs development (6/6) Teams: Securities (2/2)

Scenario B
Year Costs structure Base pay Bonuses Super gross Benefits Total Remuneration On-boarding Fluctuation costs Total EGSS costs Attraction premiums Grand total EGSS costs Yearly costs 2013 2014 Yearly Yearly Yearly costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 0 0 198 280 6 957 0 0 30 324 1 064 0 0 306 329 10 748 0 0 36 913 1 295 0 0 343 243 12 044 0 0 160 081 5 617 0 0 3 041 107 0 0 506 365 17 767 0 0 16 209 569 0 0 522 574 18 336 2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 513 855 6 991 122 208 1 663 842 147 11 458 101 711 1 384 943 858 12 842 87 411 1 189 7 823 106 1 039 093 14 137 27 014 368 1 066 107 14 505 2016 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 734 580 7 985 167 808 1 824 1 194 761 12 987 137 379 1 493 1 332 140 14 480 0 0 9 903 108 1 342 043 14 587 37 820 411 1 379 863 14 999 2017 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 818 761 8 900 167 808 1 824 1 306 218 14 198 137 379 1 493 1 443 597 15 691 0 0 10 062 109 1 453 658 15 801 27 014 294 1 480 673 16 094 2018 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 876 169 9 524 167 808 1 824 1 382 226 15 024 137 379 1 493 1 519 605 16 517 0 0 10 223 111 1 529 828 16 629 21 612 235 1 551 440 16 863
1
Positive
2
Most likely
Year
2015 Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE 532 613 7 246 122 208 1 663 877 460 11 938 101 711 1 384 979 172 13 322 91 871 1 250 11 502 156 1 082 544 14 728 27 014 368 1 109 558 15 096
3
Negative
68
2017 2018 Yearly Yearly Yearly Yearly costs costs/FTE costs costs/FTE 928 933 10 097 1 028 277 11 177 167 808 1 824 167 808 1 824 1 469 633 15 974 1 602 753 17 421 137 379 1 493 137 379 1 493 1 607 012 17 468 1 740 132 18 914 0 0 0 0 27 547 299 31 319 340 1 634 559 17 767 1 771 451 19 255 27 014 294 21 612 235 2013 Czech Republic 1 661 574 18 061 Deloitte 1 793 062 19 490
Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee, and its network of member firms, each of which is a legally separate and independent entity. Please see www.deloitte.com/cz/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and its member firms. 2013 Deloitte Czech Republic
69

EGSS Final+Report 130523

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EGSS Final+Report 130523

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Remuneration and Workforce (Cost) Planning Final report

1st draft for discussion

Introduction Management Summary Client Situation

Internal Analysis Summary

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

External analysis (market)

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Introduction Management Summary Client Situation

Internal Analysis Summary

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Q2: Workforce costs implications (most likely scenario)

Domestic payments Austria

Favorable availability of required workforce

Domestic payments Hungary

Total Remuneration Total team costs Grand total team costs

11 826 18 793 19 193

13 063 15 498 15 782

15 552 15 712 16 138

16 655 16 843 17 128

18 499 18 694 18 836

Motto: How to keep personal expenses flat

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Introduction Management Summary Client Situation

Internal Analysis Summary

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Current workforce in EGSS:

Q3/2013 Q3/2013 Q2-3/2014 Q1-2/2014 Q1/2015

Total targeted EGSS headcount in 2016: 288 FTEs

Planned EGSS headcount growth (timeline)

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Introduction Management Summary Client Situation

Internal Analysis Summary

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Remuneration & motivation

Development & trainings

Recruitment & Onboarding

Introduction Management Summary Client Situation

Internal Analysis Summary

Regional Labour Market Development Trends - Summary

Workforce Cost Analysis Appendices

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Planned investments in the region

Macroeconomic prognosis Socioeconomic environment and demographics

Labour market & employment

Unemployment in the SM region in detail

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

Regional Labour Market Development Trends - Summary

Workforce Cost Analysis Appendices

2013 Deloitte Czech Republic

B Socio-economic Environment and Demographics

C Labour Market and Employment

42% 53% Employed 5%

Unemployed*** Source: S, 2012

11.4% 8.6% 2.7%

Admin and Financial and support insurance activities

D Structure of Unemployed in the SM Region in Detail (1/3)

# of unemployed 29,014 30,000

Nr. of targeted unemployed by different regions 1,212 158

1,054 1,000 500 0

D Structure of Unemployed in the SM Region in Detail (2/3)

Good Special requirement for S&T positions

at least pasive English

Main targeted region