|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact: |
Jenny McNeill |
Personnel Manager |
Tel: 023 8064 4000 ext 524 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
Introduction |
|
|
1.1 |
A report was presented to the Personnel Committee on 12 March 2001 describing the background to the current job evaluation process, the legislation driving this and the progress to date. |
|
|
1.2 |
The purpose of this report is to give a further update on progress and seek approval on two issues. |
|
|
1.3 |
This report was prepared in partnership with Unison and GMB representatives and reflects a shared view of progress made. |
|
|
2 |
Progress |
|
|
2.1 |
Job Analysis/Evaluation |
|
|
|
2.1.1 |
Interviews have been conducted with most post holders. This exercise should be completed by the end of August 2001. |
|
|
|
|
2.1.2 |
Consistency checks conducted by the moderating panels, a representative group of trained and experienced HFRS managers and trade union representatives, are ongoing. Completion is expected by the end of September 2001. |
|
|
|
|
2.1.3 |
This process has proved to be far more resource intensive than was originally envisaged. The additional time spent on dealing with unanticipated issues that emerged during the process were considered essential and may well save time and resources in the longer term. |
|
|
2.2 |
Grading Structure |
|
|
|
2.2.1 |
The process of developing a robust grading structure is well under way. Pay modelling is the process that translates the rank order generated by the job evaluation into a new grading structure. This involves allocating newly ranked posts into a series of models to illustrate the impact of a number of options available. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2.2 |
There is a commitment to regrade staff with effect from 1 June 2001. However, personal protection arrangements for staff who may be adversely affected financially will need to be taken into account. We will not arrive at a formal agreement with the Trade Unions regarding protection until the final stages of the grading review process have been ratified by the Personnel Committee and by a ballot of Trade Union members. |
|
|
|
2.2.3 |
The financial allocation made by the Authority on 7 February 2001 was £190,000 per annum from 2001/02. The most significant costs will appear in the early years of implementation and the indications are that original budget assumptions will need to be revised to reflect this. The outcome will have to be considered by the Personnel Committee and the Finance & General Purposes Committee. |
|
|
|
2.2.4 |
To ensure continued progress is made on this matter, it is requested that the Personnel Committee appoint a small group of Members to oversee and approve implementation on behalf of the Personnel Committee. It is likely this group will need to be convened in the Autumn. This will enable a ballot of trade union members within the Service to proceed. |
|
|
3 |
External Influences Impacting on Recruitment and Retention |
|
|
3.1 |
Many employers in this region are experiencing difficulties in recruitment and retention in certain sectors of the employment market. HFRS is no different. Where practicable, account of this will be taken in considering any supplements to pay and benefits packages. |
|
|
4 |
Posts Outside the Job Evaluation Scheme |
|
|
4.1 |
With the agreement of the Trades Unions, posts within the following areas have been excluded from the above job evaluation exercise: |
|
|
|
4.1.1 |
Control Room Staff |
|
|
|
|
|
This group of employees were formerly Green Book, but have now transferred to Grey Book conditions and therefore are outside this scheme. |
|
|
|
|
4.1.2 |
Occupational Health Staff |
|
|
- Occupational Health Physician |
|
|
- Occupational Health Adviser |
|
|
- Screening Nurse |
|
|
|
|
|
These posts, being medical professional posts, are better compared to British Medical Association and Royal School of Nursing rates. We will continue to pay the equivalent rate on the NJC scheme in line with the recognised professional rates of pay. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1.3 |
Emergency Catering/ICU Team |
|
|
|
|
|
The call-out nature of these posts and availability requirements, similar to those of retained firefighters, could not be fairly reflected in the job evaluation scheme. Staff have been consulted on this and were content to continue with the existing arrangements. |
|
|
5 |
Conclusion |
|
|
5.1 |
Members will be asked to view options for; |
|
( i) pay structures |
|
( ii) transitional costs and protection |
|
(iii) market position |
|
|
6 |
European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998 |
|
|
6.1 |
The proposals within this report are compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998. |
|
|
|
Recommendations |
|
1 |
That the Committee appoint a small group of members to oversee and approve implementation of the new grading structure. |
|
|
2 |
That options for regrading and financial implications be reported to the Personnel Committee and Finance & General Purposes Committee for evaluation and approval and their decisions be taken into account when the revised and forward budgets are considered by the Authority. |
|
|
|
Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers |
|
The following documents disclose the facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of the report. |
|
|
|
|
NB The list excludes: |
|
1 Published works |
2 Documents that disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act |
|
|
|
File name [jobeval.rep] |
