Part of WCBC’s Compensation Insights for Consulting Engineering Firms Series

This blog is part of WCBC’s Compensation Insights for Consulting Engineering Firms series, featuring findings from our 2026 Consulting Engineers Compensation Report. Explore additional insights on compensation in our upcoming blog post: Can Employees See a Future With Your Firm?

As consulting engineering firms establish their 2027 compensation budgets, much of the attention will naturally be placed on the percentage increase employees will receive. That is an important decision, but it is not the only one. A firm can provide competitive salary increases and still allow its salary structure to fall behind the market.

Salary increases and salary range adjustments serve different purposes. An increase changes what an individual is paid. A range adjustment changes the framework used to recruit, pay and progress employees across a position or career level. When salaries move faster than the ranges that contain them, more employees can approach or reach the maximum of their range, even when their pay remains reasonable in relation to the external market.

Results show why the distinction matters

The 2026 WCBC Consulting Engineers Compensation Report found that among participating firms, base salaries for professionals such as engineers, scientists, technicians and technologists increased by an average of 3.91% nationally in 2026. Salary range structures for the same employee group increased by an average of 2.65%.

The difference does not necessarily mean that either decision was inappropriate. Salary increases may reflect individual performance, progression through a range, retention pressures or adjustments for employees whose pay had fallen behind. Range adjustments are intended to reflect broader movement in the market. Nevertheless, when employee salaries repeatedly increase faster than the salary structure, firms may begin to experience compression or find that their ranges no longer support their intended market position.

For 2027, participating organizations project average base salary increases of 3.37% for professionals, compared with average range adjustments of 3.11%. The corresponding medians are 3.0% for base salaries and 3.5% for salary ranges. These projections suggest that many firms are considering both elements of their compensation programs, rather than treating the annual salary budget as the entire market response.

A budget percentage does not establish market competitiveness

An organization that increases salaries by 3% does not automatically remain competitive if market pay for a particular position has moved by more than 3%. The reverse is also true. A position may require little or no market adjustment even when the organization provides employees with increases for performance or progression.

This is why a single, organization-wide percentage can be an incomplete answer. Labour market pressure may differ by engineering discipline, career level, geographic location or type of firm. The appropriate response could include a general structure adjustment, targeted changes to selected ranges, individual market adjustments or a combination of these approaches.

Pay transparency is making salary ranges more visible

Salary ranges are no longer only internal compensation tools. They are increasingly visible to candidates, employees and competitors.

The 2026 WCBC Consulting Engineers Compensation Report found that 89% of participating firms included pay ranges in their publicly posted job opportunities. However, the reasons for doing so varied. Just over two-thirds, 67%, included ranges in jurisdictions where disclosure was required by legislation, while 22% included them voluntarily. Only 11% reported that they did not include pay ranges.

These results indicate that salary range disclosure is already a common recruitment practice among participating consulting engineering firms. They also suggest that legislation remains an important driver, with voluntary disclosure accounting for a smaller, although meaningful, portion of the market.

Pay transparency legislation is helping to drive this practice. British Columbia, Prince Edward Island and Ontario now require pay information to be included in certain publicly advertised job postings. Although the specific requirements vary, the broader direction is clear: employers increasingly need salary ranges that are current, credible and suitable for public disclosure.

For consulting engineering firms recruiting across provincial boundaries, these requirements add another reason to maintain current and defensible salary structures. A range developed primarily for internal use may now be viewed by candidates, existing employees and competing employers.

If an advertised range is difficult to reconcile with what current employees are paid, the organization may face questions about internal equity, progression opportunities and how starting salaries are determined. Very broad ranges may satisfy disclosure requirements in some jurisdictions, but they may provide limited value to candidates and can be difficult to explain. Conversely, a narrow hiring range that is not clearly distinguished from the full salary range may give employees an incomplete picture of their longer-term earning opportunities.

Firms should therefore be clear about what a posted range represents. It may be the full salary range for the position, the portion of the range available to a new hire or a reasonable estimate of the compensation expected for a particular vacancy. Whichever approach is used, the advertised information should be consistent with the firm’s compensation structure and actual hiring practices.

Questions to consider before finalizing the 2027 budget

Before approving salary increase and range adjustment budgets, firms should consider whether their current ranges still reflect the market in which they intend to compete. They should also review:

• How many employees are near or above their range maximums
• Whether pay relationships between career levels remain appropriate
• Whether recruitment or retention difficulties are concentrated in particular positions
• Whether advertised pay ranges are consistent with the internal salary structure
• Whether managers can clearly explain how employees progress through a range
• Whether the firm’s ranges remain appropriate across the jurisdictions in which it recruits

Detailed, position-specific market information is central to that review. It allows an organization to separate general salary movement from changes affecting particular roles and to direct its compensation budget where it is most needed.

Annual increases remain important, but they are only one part of maintaining a sound compensation program. For consulting engineering firms preparing for upcoming changes, the more useful question is not simply how much salaries should increase. It is whether the resulting salaries and structures will continue to support the firm’s market position, internal pay relationships, recruitment practices and workforce needs.