Pay Review Project 2016-18 Implementation Date: 1 st April 2018 - - PDF document

26/03/2017 1

Pay Review Project 2016-18 Implementation Date: 1st April 2018

Staff Briefing Sessions – March 2017

What is the Pay Review Project?

As part of the outcome from the 2013/14 pay negotiations, it was agreed that a project would take place to consider the following elements: – To review the current grading structures – To remove overlapping pay bands (implemented April 2016) – To have fewer salary points per band and consider the introduction

• f spot salaries

– To review the application and validity of the cash alternative scheme and the essential user allowance – To review the existing mileage amounts with a view to moving to the HMRC rates During the 2016/17 pay negotiations, a commitment was confirmed from both elected members and from staff side representatives to review the pay structures. In addition, the project would now also consider: – Removal of annual automatic increments – A full job evaluation process

26/03/2017 2

Project Workstreams

3 Workstreams

October 2016 – December 2017 – Pay & Grading (including job evaluation) April 2017 – December 2017 – Performance Management Framework – Review of Car Allowances & Mileage Payments

Who Is Involved?

Project Sponsor – Tim Madden Project Manager – Andrina Smith HR Project Officer – Gemma Candy LGA Consultant – Adam Barker Performance Management Framework Leads – Jo Gage & Ritchie Bennett Allowance Review Lead – Penny Reeson

26/03/2017 3

What is Job Evaluation?

• A systematic process for establishing the

relative values of jobs

• Based on consistent judgements
• A study of job content
• A means to an end: to help define a grading

structure

• Only one piece of the jigsaw

Job Evaluation is not...

• A science
• A negotiation
• An assessment of the job holder
• A review of job design

26/03/2017 4

Why Are We Doing Job Evaluation?

• Establish relative job size
• Provide an understanding of current job roles
• Provide a foundation for a fair pay structure

design

• Ensure equal value
• Provide a system of fair and consistent

evaluation of jobs

Job Evaluation Scheme Factors

Knowledge Mental Skills Interpersonal and Communication Skills Physical Skills Initiative and Independence Physical Demands Mental Demands Emotional Demands Responsibility for People Responsibility for Supervision Responsibility for Financial Resources Responsibility for Physical Resources Working Conditions

26/03/2017 5

What Has Happened So Far?

October 2016 – February 2017:

• New JD template designed
• No longer using the lengthy old JDQ forms
• 35 roles benchmarked – new job descriptions written

and evaluated

• List of roles with scores – new pay structure can start

to be formulated around these early outcomes

• Some managers, staff reps & union reps trained on

the existing NJC scheme and a potential new LGA scheme for higher salaried roles

• Regular updates provided to Personnel Committee,

CMT, OMT and SCF

Which Jobs Were Benchmarked?

Toilet Cleaner Assistant Building Control Officer Gardener Senior Corporate Debt Officer Leisure Attendant Senior Planning Officer Civic Warden Project Officer Business Support Assistant Horticultural Manager HR Assistant Regeneration Officer Customer Contact Officer HR Business Partner Arborist Private Sector Housing Team Leader Information Officer Development Management Team Leader PA Property Manager Environmental Enforcement Officer Customer Services Manager Control Centre Officer Elections Manager Trainee Legal Executive Development Management Manager Communities Officer Group Accountant Finance Officer Legal Services Manager Systems Support (Weakley) Project Manager Planning Officer Strategic Development Project Manager Private Sector Housing Officer

26/03/2017 6

What have we learnt so far?

• Quality of content in the JD varied – this can impact on

the scores allocated by the panel

• Feedback provided on the 1st draft was not always

taken on board

• By sending the finalised JD to evaluation panel

members in advance has drastically shortened the time taken for each role evaluation

• The evaluation panels reached a consistent approach

very quickly

• Our views as the evaluation panel were generally also

the same as the view held by the consultant

The Job Description Review Process

Example –

• 3rd April – first meeting with the line manager to review the

identified job description

• 3 weeks later – deadline to return the first draft
• Within 1 week we will review the draft and return it to the

line manager

• 1 week later – deadline to return the finalised job

description to us That’s it – the job description is accepted and there are no further amendments before it is evaluated The deadlines that are set are not negotiable

26/03/2017 7

What will we do to help?

• Schedule in a meeting to start the job description

rewrite process with your line manager

• Start populating the new job description during the

meeting & email that to the line manager at the end of the meeting

• Available for support whilst your manager is writing the

new document

• Review the 1st draft of the job description and provide

feedback / comments / challenges / suggestions

What have line managers been told?

• Do request the old job description before the meeting if

they don’t have a copy

• Don’t update the electronic version of the current job

description

• Do meet the deadline set for the return of the 1st or 2nd draft
• f the job description – CMT’s view is clear: this is non-

negotiable

• Do contact us if you have a query over the job description

while you are re-writing it

• Do engage with the post holders
• Do allocate enough time for yourself and your post holders

to complete the review

26/03/2017 8

When Is Your Job Being Reviewed?

• 35 jobs completed during benchmarking
• 143 jobs still to go, but all now timetabled
• Review dates will be published on the intranet
• Fixed term roles due to end before 31 March 2018 are

not being evaluated unless extended

• Grow Our Own Trainees / Apprentices are not being

reviewed

• Evaluation Panels take place May – August 2017
• No outcomes communicated until late 2017
• There will be an appeals process

Number Service Area Position Name Grade Name Meeting 17 Strategic Development Projects Architect SDC Grade H 03/03/2017 91 Communities Community Safety Officer SDC Grade E 03/03/2017 25 Democratic Services & Law Solicitor SDC Grade H 06/03/2017 2 Planning Masterplanning, Urban Design and Viability Project SDC Grade J 06/03/2017 48 Finance Senior Recovery Officer SDC Grade F 06/03/2017 28 Finance Print Services Team Leader SDC Grade G 07/03/2017 102 Human Resources HR Officer SDC Grade D/E 07/03/2017 3 Commercial & Technical Services Principal Building Control Officer SDC Grade J 07/03/2017 6 Commercial & Technical Services Senior Building Control Officer SDC Grade I 07/03/2017 86 Commercial & Technical Services Supervisor - Romney Marsh & Hythe SDC Grade E 08/03/2017 4 Finance Revenues & Benefits Strategic Manager SDC Grade I 08/03/2017 5 Planning Planning Policy Manager SDC Grade I 08/03/2017 1 Finance Chief Accountant SDC Grade J 08/03/2017 7 Communities Community Services Manager SDC Grade I 08/03/2017 8 Communities Principal Environmental Health Officer SDC Grade I 08/03/2017 9 Communities Housing Strategy Manager SDC Grade I 08/03/2017 26 Chief Executive Leadership Support Manager SDC Grade H 09/03/2017 69 Chief Executive Policy & Performance Officer SDC Grade F 09/03/2017 10 Democratic Services & Law Corporate Contracts Manager SDC Grade I 09/03/2017

26/03/2017 9

Who is on the Evaluation Panel?

• HR (chair)
• Independent Manager
• Union or Staff Representative

Already trained – Andrina Smith, Gemma Candy, Pat Main, Ben Geering, Bev Jackson, Steve Weakley, Laura Pinkham, Laura Palmer, Annette Jones, Steve Makin, Lee Walker & Alastair Clifford Reserves to be trained – Penny Reeson, Ritchie Bennett, Sophie Munns, Shannon Wheeler, Matt Rain, Sarah Robson, Arthur Atkins, Jyotsna Leney, Leigh Hall, Nick Harvey, Jess Harman & Lorraine Mitchell

Remember:

• Reflect the job itself as it is now
• You are writing about the job, not the post holder(s)
• The content is important - be as detailed as possible
• In free text boxes, provide examples/context
• Update the person specification – what are the

essential and desirable requirements

• Post holders should be included in the review
• Don’t use abbreviations – the panel may not know

what you mean

26/03/2017 10

Remember:

• Reflect the job itself as it is now
• You are writing about the job, not the post holder(s)
• The content is important - be as detailed as possible
• In free text boxes, provide examples/context
• Update the person specification – what are the

essential and desirable requirements

• Post holders should be included in the review
• Don’t use abbreviations – the panel may not know

what you mean The panel will score based on the content of the JD – they will not work on any assumptions

Communications

• Communications plan has been drafted & approved
• Planned regular updates for staff / managers from

March

• Intranet page will be updated with relevant information

following the March briefing sessions

• Online information wherever feasible
• Staff Consultation Forum / CMT / OMT / Personnel

Committee

26/03/2017 11

Any questions?