The final report must explain the method and show at least one adjustment. This is the form that example takes: two faculty members in the same column, the numbers behind each, the gap, the adjustment, its cost with benefits, and how it phases if CSN funds it over two years. The members are fictional and the figures are synthetic.
Placed under the pre-2022 formula. Received the across-the-board COLAs and the tenure increase like everyone else, so the gap set at hire has carried forward.
Same column and same credited experience as Member A, seven years less CSN service, placed under the current table.
The agreement entitles each member to their result and the method behind it. Member A's statement would show the column and credited years on file, the expected salary and how it was built, the actual salary, the gap, the adjustment, the effective dates of each phase, and how to appeal to the Salary Equity Committee within the agreement's process. Member B's statement would say that no adjustment applies and show the same arithmetic.
Member B earns more than Member A with the same education, the same credited experience and seven fewer years at CSN. That is an inversion, and it is the pattern an equity study exists to find. The rule-based lens measures it directly; the statistical model confirms whether it is one case or a pattern across the column.