Privacy-friendly analytics help us see which jobs people explore. They stay off unless you agree.Analytics off unless you agree. Details

Read the record
Back to the river
Skip to sources
Time Machine

Compensation and benefits managers

Also called Compensation manager, Benefits manager, Total rewards manager, Director of compensation, Director of benefits

In brief

In May 2025, BLS counted 22,940 US compensation and benefits managers, with median pay of $149,230 a year. Of the BLS counts since 2012, the May 2025 count is the highest. The earliest figure here is an estimate of 12,000 from 1950, not measured the same way as today's count. The last full technology era for compensation and benefits managers: AI-native compensation benchmarking, 2019 to 2023.

What the sources say

Official outlook

BLS projects employment to grow 1.1% from 2025 to 2035.

BLS Employment Projections 2025-35

AI exposure studies

Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35. BLS publishes these counts as yearly survey snapshots and cautions against reading them as a precise trend. In May 2021 BLS changed how it estimates these counts (a model-based method using three years of survey data) and moved fully to the 2018 occupation codes, so part of a change across 2021 can come from the method rather than the work.

Last updated .

Cite this page
APA

Future History. (2026, October 11). Compensation and benefits managers: jobs and pay since 1950 [Data set; data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35]. https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/11-3111

Chicago

Future History. "Compensation and benefits managers: jobs and pay since 1950." Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35. Last modified October 11, 2026. https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/11-3111.

BibTeX

@misc{futurehistory_11_3111, author = {{Future History}}, title = {Compensation and benefits managers: jobs and pay since 1950}, year = {2026}, month = oct, howpublished = {\url{https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/11-3111}}, note = {Last updated 2026-10-11. Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35}, }

The access date is today's date on your device.

drag to travel through time
1925195019752000now
2026
Known then as Wage Administrator / Employment Manager (industrial-era personnel)
Known then as Salary and Wage Administrator (wartime job-evaluation era)
Known then as Compensation Manager / Benefits Manager (post-ERISA specialization)
Known then as Compensation and Benefits Manager (combined function, pre-SOC split)
Known then as Compensation and Benefits Managers (BLS SOC 11-3111)
Known today as Compensation and Benefits Managers (BLS SOC 11-3111)
Projected to still be called Compensation and Benefits Managers (BLS SOC 11-3111)
Data from the May 2025 survey
US Employment
23K
Est.

Stated in source: BLS OEWS

Official statistic
Report an error
Median Annual Wage
$149,230
Est.

≈ $145,404 in 2024 prices (derived by us, CPI-adjusted)

Official statistic
Report an error
Beat · 1918

The National War Labor Board of 1918 (NWLB, the World War I version) becomes the first federal body to press employers to adopt formal job classification and wage-rate structures as a condition of wartime labor stability. Dozens of large manufacturers in munitions, shipbuilding, and steel build compensation offices to comply, training a generation of practitioners who will go on to professionalize the function in the 1920s and 1930s.

Beat · 1942

The War Labor Board of World War II (NWLB II) explicitly exempts employer-sponsored health benefits and fringe benefits from its wage-freeze orders, ruling in 1942 that benefits improvements do not constitute "wage increases" for price-control purposes. Employers who cannot raise cash wages begin competing for scarce wartime labor through health insurance, life insurance, and pension contributions. By 1953, employer-sponsored health insurance covers 63% of Americans, up from 9% in 1940. This shift permanently creates the employer-based benefits system that benefits managers administer to this day.

Beat · 1943

Edward N. Hay, a management consultant and former head personnel officer at First Pennsylvania Bank in Philadelphia, develops the three-dimensional point-factor job evaluation method that will bear his name. The Hay Guide Charts, formalized by 1951, measure every job on three dimensions: know-how, problem-solving, and accountability. The system becomes the most widely adopted job evaluation methodology in the world, providing the technical foundation that justifies compensation as a distinct professional function rather than a subset of general administration.

Beat · 1955

The Ohio Wage and Salary Association is founded in Toledo, Ohio, by wage and salary professionals who want to share best pay practices and benchmark data. This is the first professional association dedicated exclusively to compensation management. It will rename itself the Midwest Compensation Association, then the American Compensation Association (ACA) in 1963, and finally WorldatWork in 2000. The association launches the Certified Compensation Professional (CCP) credential in 1976 and the annual Salary Budget Survey in 1974, establishing the professional and educational infrastructure of the field.

Beat · 1963

Congress passes the Equal Pay Act of 1963, prohibiting wage discrimination on the basis of sex for substantially equal work. For compensation managers, the law introduces the first federal mandate to audit pay structures across gender lines and document a legitimate business reason for any differential. The Equal Pay Act prefigures a regulatory layer that will expand dramatically: OFCCP compensation analysis obligations (1970s), California SB 1162 (2023), and the EU Pay Transparency Regulation (2026) all descend from the same logic that compensation differentials must be explainable or remediable.

Beat · 1974

President Gerald Ford signs the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) on September 2, 1974 -- after a decade of pension reform advocacy catalyzed by the 1963 Studebaker plant closure, which left thousands of workers without the pensions they had been promised. ERISA establishes fiduciary standards, minimum vesting schedules, plan disclosure rules, Form 5500 annual reporting, and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. The benefits manager role, previously voluntary-optional at most companies, becomes a compliance-mandatory function. Benefits administration becomes a specialty with its own legal exposure and credentialing pathway separate from general HR.

Beat · 1981

The IRS issues rules allowing 401(k) plans to accept salary-deferral contributions, kick-starting the mass adoption of defined-contribution retirement plans. Ted Benna, a benefits consultant at the Johnson Companies in Philadelphia, had identified the opportunity in the 1978 Revenue Act and structured his own employer's plan as a proof of concept. By the mid-1980s, corporate adoption is accelerating. For benefits managers, the 401(k) replaces the actuarial complexity of defined-benefit pension funding with the operational complexity of plan design, non-discrimination testing, recordkeeper management, and continuous participant communication -- a different job, not an easier one.

Beat · 2002

The SEC begins rulemaking on executive compensation disclosure in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom accounting scandals. The resulting rules, finalized in 2006 and then expanded dramatically in 2022 with the Pay-Versus-Performance final rule (17 CFR 229.402(v), effective FY 2023 proxy filings), require public companies to disclose and reconcile "Compensation Actually Paid" against total shareholder return. For compensation and benefits managers at public companies, the SEC proxy disclosure calendar becomes a permanent fixture: preparing the pay-vs-performance table, coordinating with outside counsel, and briefing the board compensation committee are now annual mandatory tasks with legal liability if done incorrectly.

Beat · 2023

California SB 1162 (effective January 2023) and New York S9427-A (effective September 2023) require employers above threshold size to disclose pay ranges on all job postings, and California additionally mandates annual pay data reporting to the state civil rights agency. Within 18 months, pay transparency requirements cover over 25% of the U.S. workforce by employment share. The EU Pay Transparency Regulation (2023/970/EU, member-state transposition deadline June 2026) extends comparable requirements across the European Union with a 5% gender pay-gap threshold that triggers mandatory joint pay assessment. Compensation managers who have spent a decade optimizing for internal equity benchmarks must now simultaneously manage external transparency, maintaining ranges that are defensible to candidates, employees, and regulators at the same time.

How to read this number

OEWS is a point-in-time survey snapshot, not a continuous time series; BLS advises against using it for year-over-year trend comparison.

Each dot is a cited figure over time; the dotted line only links them (values between aren't measured). Hollow dots are estimates.

Official statistic: Copied by a script from a statistics agency table or a published study's table, not retyped by hand. BLS figures and the forecast and exposure tables are also re-checked against that table on every data run. Researched context: Researched from the cited source rather than copied from it by a script, so it is not machine-checked yet. Spot a mistake? Each figure has a “Report an error” link.

Cited forecasts · present → 2035

Will AI replace compensation and benefits managers? What the research says

Each figure is stated by the named source; we publish no forecasts of our own. Where sources disagree, we show the disagreement rather than an average.

Each figure is stated by the named source; we publish no forecasts of our own. Where sources disagree, the spread is the honest signal.

What published forecasts say
Forecast change in the number of people doing this work, as published by each named source. Bars share one scale on every role, centred on zero and reaching the end at ±30%. Grey marks a small change, 3% or less either way.
BLS Employment Projections 2025-35
→ 2035
+1.1%
BLS National Employment Matrix, 2025-35 cycle, line for SOC 11-3111 (Compensation and benefits managers): 23.7 thousand jobs in 2025, projected 24.0 thousand in 2035, a change of +0.3 thousand (+1.1%). Matrix employment counts all jobs in the occupation, including self-employed workers. The average for all occupations in this cycle is +3.5%.
Official statisticReport an error
How exposed is this work to AI (research measures)
Scores as published by each study. Each row says what it measures. These measure what AI could technically do, not forecasts of jobs lost.
Eloundou et al. (2023), "GPTs are GPTs"
2023 study · Share of tasks exposed to LLMs (β, human-rated)
46.1%
of tasks
What this measures

Published occupation-level exposure from the paper's occ_level.csv for O*NET-SOC 11-3111.00 Compensation and Benefits Managers. Shown: human-rated β = 0.461, the share of the occupation's tasks an LLM could do in at least half the time at equal quality, counting tasks that need LLM-powered software at half weight (β = E1 + 0.5 × E2). Other published measures for this occupation: human-rated α (LLM alone) 0.184 and γ (all LLM-assisted) 0.737; GPT-4-rated β 0.513. This measures how much of the work an LLM could touch, not how many jobs disappear.

Official statisticReport an error
Today, in this role

What's changing day to day for compensation and benefits managers

Three parts of your work where AI is already doing real lifting, and what stays yours.

AI is sitting alongside you hereDirect the annual merit and bonus cycle using Workday Illuminate or ADP comp planning modules: configure budget pools and pay-band guardrails, deploy AI-generated manager allocation worksheets, review Workday Illuminate's automated exception flagging for policy compliance and pay-equity consistency, and approve the final payroll submission, the AI enforces the rules engine, the manager owns accountability for outcomes.

Direct the annual merit and bonus cycle using Workday Illuminate or ADP comp planning modules: configure budget pools and pay-band guardrails, deploy AI-generated manager allocation worksheets, review Workday Illuminate's automated exception flagging for policy compliance and pay-equity consistency, and approve the final payroll submission, the AI enforces the rules engine, the manager owns accountability for outcomes.[9],[4],[10]

Where your edge is

Workday Illuminate agents now generate merit worksheets, route approvals, and flag budget exceedances automatically; the manager's value shifts to calibrating the rules engine (what guardrails to set, how to handle high-performers at the top of band, whether to adjust pools mid-cycle based on retention risk signals) and making the judgment calls the AI escalates. Build compensation-planning governance expertise: the person who can configure a merit cycle correctly across thousands of employees with equity consistency is irreplaceable.

AI is sitting alongside you hereDirect the transition to AI-assisted benchmarking: evaluate and select from Pave, OpenComp, Compa, Korn Ferry Pay, and Aon Radford digital platforms

Direct the transition to AI-assisted benchmarking: evaluate and select from Pave, OpenComp, Compa, Korn Ferry Pay, and Aon Radford digital platforms; retire manual salary survey submission processes; train the comp specialist team on AI-augmented workflows; and track the accuracy and bias of AI market-data recommendations, accepting accountability when a model suggests an outlier pay recommendation that causes retention or equity problems.[11],[4]

Where your edge is

The comp benchmarking tool landscape is fragmenting rapidly across Pave (startup-focused), OpenComp (mid-market), Compa (enterprise intelligence), Aon Radford (tech sector), and Korn Ferry (executive). Selecting the right vendor mix for your employee population and having the analytical fluency to challenge AI recommendations when market data is thin for rare roles: the manager who can audit the model's output is substantially more valuable than one who trusts it uncritically.

AI is sitting alongside you hereGovern the enterprise compensation philosophy and pay-band architecture: commission Pave or OpenComp to pull continuous real-time market benchmarks across peer companies and funding stages, review AI-generated band recommendations for strategic alignment, approve target percentile positioning (P50/P65/P75) by job family, and present the updated pay philosophy and band structure to the executive team and board compensation committee annually.

Govern the enterprise compensation philosophy and pay-band architecture: commission Pave or OpenComp to pull continuous real-time market benchmarks across peer companies and funding stages, review AI-generated band recommendations for strategic alignment, approve target percentile positioning (P50/P65/P75) by job family, and present the updated pay philosophy and band structure to the executive team and board compensation committee annually.[12],[13],[4]

Tools picking this up
Where your edge is

Pave and OpenComp deliver the market data continuously; the manager's value is the philosophy judgment, which percentile to target, how to balance internal equity against market pressure, and when to lead the market for talent-critical roles. WorldatWork 2025 documents that comp managers who build strategic percentile narratives anchored to business outcomes retain board-level credibility that pure data tools cannot provide. Invest in executive compensation governance and board presentation skills.

Where compensation and benefits managers go next

Natural next steps for someone with your foundation: not exits, evolutions.

What each move takes

A direction you could grow

Chief Executives

Compensation and Benefits Managers who reach the CHRO level (with demonstrated P&L accountability, board compensation-committee governance, M&A integration leadership, and a track record of total rewards strategy that drove measurable talent outcomes) are in the succession pipeline for CEO at professional services, financial services, and healthcare organizations where people are the primary competitive asset. The transition is rare but well-documented: CHROs who also develop operating experience (COO or divisional GM roles) and financial fluency make the move. The CRI delta is modest because CEO scope is highly context-dependent.

What you'd add
  • · P&L ownership: a significant departmental or divisional budget with revenue accountability, ideally including a COO or divisional GM role
  • · Board governance: investor relations, proxy statement literacy, audit committee and nominating committee relationships beyond the compensation committee
  • · M&A strategy: leading acquisition integration at enterprise scale with full operating accountability
  • · External stakeholder management: major customer relationships, public-company investor communications, media presence
  • · Total rewards as business strategy: demonstrating that people investments drove market share, margin, or competitive differentiation, the CEO track requires measurable outcomes, not just compliance
What it takesA real upskill, but a natural one
Tools of the era

How has the work of compensation and benefits managers changed since 1910?

The tools that defined the work, one line per era. Select an era to see how it reshaped the work.

  • Time-and-motion studies + point-factor rating tables (Taylor, 1911)

    Frederick Winslow Taylor's "Principles of Scientific Management" (1911) gave early wage administrators their first systematic tool: quantified task analysis used to set piece rates and wage grades. Personnel departments in large manufacturers built paper-based rating tables assigning point values to job requirements (skill, effort, responsibility, working conditions) and translating point totals into wage grades. These tables replaced foreman discretion with a defensible methodology, and they were entirely manual: physical cards, ledger books, and adding machines.

    Effect on the work

    Scientific management enabled the creation of a distinct wage-administration function separate from line supervision. The number of dedicated "employment managers" at large U.S. firms grew from a handful in 1910 to several thousand by the mid-1920s, as companies like Ford and U.S. Steel built centralized compensation offices.

  • Hay Guide Chart method (Edward N. Hay, 1943-1951)

    Edward N. Hay, a Philadelphia-based management consultant and former head personnel officer at First Pennsylvania Bank, formalized the three-dimensional point-factor method in 1943: know-how, problem-solving, and accountability. His 1951 "Guide Charts" gave compensation managers a universal lingua franca for comparing jobs across industries, divisions, and geographies. The Hay method became the world's most widely adopted job evaluation system and remains so today. For the compensation manager, it meant a structured analytical process for every new job classification decision: pull the guide chart, score the three dimensions, map to a grade, verify against salary survey data.

    Effect on the work

    The Hay method's spread through the 1950s and 1960s professionalized the compensation function and justified dedicated manager headcount at mid-size and large employers. It also created a consulting premium: Hay Group (later acquired by Korn Ferry in 2015) built a global practice on licensing the methodology and conducting salary surveys, with the compensation manager as its primary client.

  • Annual salary surveys + compensation benchmarking databases (ACA / WorldatWork, Aon Radford origins)

    The Ohio Wage and Salary Association (founded 1955, renamed the American Compensation Association in 1963 and WorldatWork in 2000) launched the annual Salary Budget Survey in 1974, giving compensation managers the first standardized national benchmarking data they could use to position their pay structures against the market. The survey model, simultaneously adopted by consulting firms (Hay, Towers Perrin, William M. Mercer), became the core operational tool of the compensation function: collect job-to-job matches against a shared survey instrument, receive anonymized peer pay data, calibrate internal grades to external percentiles. The process was entirely paper and telephone-based through the 1970s, transitioning to mainframe data entry and printed reports in the 1980s.

    Effect on the work

    Annual salary surveys created a recognized professional workflow, established WorldatWork and its Certified Compensation Professional (CCP, launched 1976) as the guild credential, and ensured that organizations above a certain size maintained at least one dedicated compensation professional to manage the survey submission and analysis cycle.

  • ERISA compliance systems + defined-benefit plan administration (post-1974)

    President Gerald Ford signed the Employee Retirement Income Security Act on September 2, 1974, creating the modern benefits administration profession almost overnight. ERISA imposed fiduciary standards, vesting schedules, plan disclosure requirements, annual reporting (Form 5500), and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation as backstop for failed defined-benefit plans. Every employer maintaining a retirement or health plan became subject to a permanent compliance calendar that required specialized management. The benefits manager role, previously focused on plan design and carrier negotiation, gained a compliance and fiduciary dimension that made deep expertise non-optional.

    Effect on the work

    ERISA drove a measurable expansion in corporate benefits administration headcount during the late 1970s and 1980s. Law firms and consulting firms built ERISA practices; benefits managers became among the first HR practitioners regularly retained as specialists rather than as part of a general personnel function.

  • 401(k) administration systems (Revenue Act 1978, IRS rules 1981, mass adoption 1985-2000)

    The 1978 Revenue Act created Internal Revenue Code Section 401(k); the IRS issued rules allowing salary-deferral contributions in 1981, and by the mid-1980s employer adoption was accelerating rapidly. For compensation and benefits managers, the 401(k) replaced a relatively static defined-benefit pension obligation with a constantly evolving defined-contribution administration challenge: enrollment processing, investment option curation, non-discrimination testing (ACP/ADP tests), employer match calculation, vesting tracking, hardship withdrawal management, and annual plan document updates. By 1997, when DC plans first surpassed DB plans in total US retirement assets, the 401(k) had become the dominant workload in most corporate benefits functions.

    Effect on the work

    The 401(k) shift permanently expanded the technical scope of the benefits manager role. Defined-benefit plans were stable once designed; 401(k) administration is an ongoing high-volume process requiring HRIS integration, recordkeeper vendor management, and annual IRS non-discrimination testing. This complexity justified headcount expansion in the 1980s and 1990s, before third-party recordkeepers (Fidelity, Vanguard, Schwab) absorbed the operational layer in the 2000s.

  • HRIS-integrated compensation modules (SAP HR, PeopleSoft, Workday launch 2005)

    Enterprise HRIS platforms brought the merit cycle, salary planning, and benefits enrollment into a single integrated system for the first time. SAP HR (mid-1990s) and PeopleSoft HRMS allowed compensation managers to configure pay grade structures, budget pools, and merit matrices directly in the system that stored employee records, eliminating the Excel-spreadsheet-and-manual-upload workflow that characterized the 1980s. Workday, founded in 2005 and reaching scale in the early 2010s, took HRIS into the cloud and made real-time compensation reporting accessible to line managers, creating the expectation of instant pay visibility that AI tools would later fulfill even more completely.

    Effect on the work

    HRIS integration shifted the compensation manager's role from data collection and calculation to system configuration and governance. The manager who once manually tabulated survey data and recalculated grade midpoints in spreadsheets became the architect of pay rules encoded in software. This reduced the administrative burden while increasing the technical complexity of the role.

  • AI-native compensation benchmarking (Pave 2019, OpenComp 2021, Compa CompetitiveIQ 2024)

    Pave, founded in 2019, pioneered the model of continuous real-time compensation benchmarking from aggregated HRIS data across thousands of companies, eliminating the need for annual survey submission cycles. OpenComp (2021) and Compa (2024, leveraging state pay transparency law disclosures) extended the model. For compensation managers, these platforms collapsed the core execution task of market benchmarking from a months-long survey cycle to a real-time dashboard, freeing manager time toward the governance, strategy, and compliance tasks that AI cannot perform.

    Effect on the work

    WorldatWork's 2025 Compensation Programs and Practices Survey documented that AI adoption in compensation is accelerating, with a large share of benchmarking and merit-cycle coordination hours flowing through automated platforms by 2025. The manager layer is not being eliminated, but it is concentrating: fewer practitioners, each covering more analytical ground with AI leverage.

  • Pay transparency laws + AI pay-equity analytics (Syndio, Trusaic, Workday Illuminate 2025)

    California SB 1162 (effective January 2023), New York S9427-A (effective September 2023), Colorado EPEWA (expanded 2024), and the EU Pay Transparency Regulation (member-state transposition by June 2026) collectively created the most significant new compliance surface in compensation management since ERISA. Simultaneously, AI pay-equity analytics platforms (Syndio, Trusaic PayParity) moved from annual snapshot analysis to continuous real-time gap monitoring. Workday Illuminate's September 2025 expansion added AI agents that automate merit worksheet generation and exception flagging. The compensation manager of 2025-2026 operates in a dual environment: more regulatory accountability than at any prior point in the profession's history, and more AI assistance for the execution layer than was imaginable in 2015.

    Effect on the work

    Pay transparency law compliance added a permanent new task category to the manager's work calendar, while AI automation reduced the execution burden on benchmarking and administration. The net headcount effect is secular decline but with higher per-manager responsibility, legal exposure, and compensation.

Part of Management · see all 36 roles →
Different role?

See the same long-arc view for your own profession.

Browse the directory by industry, or search by title or SOC code.

Browse all roles

Compensation and Benefits Managers employment and pay by year

On record since1910
Latest US employment22,940 (May 2025)Source: BLS OEWS May 2025Official statisticReport an error
Latest US median pay$149,230 (May 2025)Source: BLS OEWS May 2025Official statisticReport an error
Outlook+1.1% by 2035Source: BLS Employment Projections 2025-35Official statisticReport an error
View all 20 years of cited US data, each linked to its source
YearUS employmentAnnual pay (median unless marked)SourceReport
195012,000n/aEst., University of Missouri Libraries Researched contextReport
1955n/a$6,500Est., University of Missouri Libraries Researched contextReport
197522,000$22,000Est., DOL / EBSA (employment) Researched contextEst., University of Missouri Libraries (pay) Researched contextReport
199728,000n/aEst., CNBC / Guideline Researched contextReport
201029,830$89,270BLS OEWS May 2010 Official statisticReport
201124,580$92,290BLS OEWS May 2011 Official statisticReport
201219,960$95,250BLS OEWS May 2012 Official statisticReport
201317,570$101,490BLS OEWS May 2013 Official statisticReport
201416,380$108,070BLS OEWS May 2014 Official statisticReport
201515,930$111,430BLS OEWS May 2015 Official statisticReport
201615,230$116,240BLS OEWS May 2016 Official statisticReport
201715,520$119,120BLS OEWS May 2017 Official statisticReport
201815,660$121,010BLS OEWS May 2018 Official statisticReport
201916,900$122,270BLS OEWS May 2019 Official statisticReport
202016,340$125,130BLS OEWS May 2020 Official statisticReport
202115,330$127,530BLS OEWS May 2021 Official statisticReport
202216,850$131,280BLS OEWS May 2022 Official statisticReport
202318,690$136,380BLS OEWS May 2023 Official statisticReport
202420,070$140,360BLS OEWS May 2024 Official statisticReport
202522,940$149,230BLS OEWS May 2025 Official statisticReport
Embed this timeline on your site

Free for any site. Paste this where the timeline should appear; it stays interactive, every datapoint stays cited, and it sets no cookies on your page. How embedding works

<iframe src="https://futurehistory.earth/embed/11-3111"
  width="100%" height="430" style="border:0"
  title="Compensation and Benefits Managers, a Future History timeline"
  loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font-size:13px;margin:4px 0 0"><a href="https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/11-3111">Compensation and Benefits Managers: jobs and pay over time</a>, from Future History</p>

See all roles in Management