Archived decisions

Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority

Personnel Committee Item 3

18 September 2002

Grading Review of Support Staff Posts

Report of the Chief Fire Officer



Contact: Jennifer McNeill Personnel Manager 023 8064 4000 ext 524



1	Background

1.1	Legislation and Previous Practice

	1.1.1	Under the Local Government Single Status Agreement all posts covered by the National Joint Council for Local Government Services (Green Book) terms and conditions must be subjected to a pay and grading review. The purpose of this review is to ensure that authorities have a non-discriminatory grading system based upon a recognised and approved methodology. All such reviews are to be undertaken within the wider legislative context of Equal Pay Legislation.

	1.1.2	Hampshire County Council, using the HAY job evaluation process, had previously carried out reviews of grades on behalf of HFRS. However, it was timely to take this opportunity to bring the management of this process back to HFRS.

	1.1.3	Further, a preliminary review of our grading structure had highlighted that anomalies had crept into the pay and grading structure over time, so it was essential that we achieved a fair and objective grading system which was consistent, open and transparent, and that these anomalies were addressed within the Review.


2	Project Management - Parties And Partners Involved

2.1	Trade Unions

	2.1.1	The entire process from Job Analysis, Job Evaluation and Pay Modeling was conducted in partnership with Unison, GMB. This arrangement was beneficial for the Service and our employees. As the union representatives were an active and productive part of the Steering Group from the onset and received the same training, they were able to give balanced advice and guidance to their members and regional officials from a position of knowledge and expertise.


2.2	Management

	2.2.1	A representative Steering Group was formed to undertake this project, consisting of a cross-section of employees reflecting the Fire Safety, Operations, Training, Corporate Services and Personnel functions. This comprised support staff, uniformed officers and trade union representatives from Unison and GMB. All the above were trained in the principles of Job Analysis and Job Evaluation techniques. The Personnel Manager, a member of SMT, was the project owner, with senior personnel officers managing the project and undertaking the extensive administrative support.

	2.2.2	The Personnel manager was involved in negotiations with Regional Union Officials at critical stages of the process, each with a remit to commit to decisions on behalf of HFRS and their respective trade unions.

2.3	Information to Staff`

	Throughout the Grading Review, employees were kept informed of progress via regular bulletins in Routine Notice (weekly written information updates for staff). In addition to this, a number of presentations were held, both at Service HQ and Divisional HQ, at which employees were informed of progress to date and were given the opportunity to ask questions of the Steering Group. When employees were advised of the outcome of the Review as it affected them individually, information packs were distributed with each results letter, which included details of the Appeals process, and a help line was established which was in operation for two days.

3	National Joint Council (NJC) Scheme

3.1	Several job evaluation schemes were considered initially. The National Joint Council (NJC) Job Evaluation Scheme was selected by HFRS to analyse and evaluate the posts. This Scheme had been developed and approved at national level by a joint management/union working party. The NJC Job Evaluation Scheme was designed for use within the local government environment and was already accepted as being compliant with `equal opportunities' legislation and best practice. Further, the Scheme allowed for `local conventions' to be developed to meet specific organisational requirements.

3.2	The scheme consists of 13 criteria or `factors' which are used to analyse job content and produce a `total score' for each post. These are:

· 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

3.3	Each of the above is given different weightings as defined in the Green Book and the total score ranking produced by the Job Evaluation process is then used to form the basis of a new pay and grading scheme.

4	Posts Included In The Review

4.1	It was agreed that all support posts would be included in the pay and grading review. Excluded from the process, however, were staff who were paid on a retained basis similar to retained firefighters, such as Emergency Catering; Teachers in Community Fire Safety, paid according to recognised teaching scales; Medical (Occupational Health) staff, paid to reflect Nursing and British Medical Adviser scales; and Apprentices, paid in accordance with recognised and agreed apprenticeship rates. These exceptions were agreed at the outset.

4.2	128 posts were evaluated in total, involving 238 employees.


5	Expertise

5.1	Training and Support for Steering Group

	5.1.1	All members of the steering group attended a 2-day job evaluation training course arranged by South East Employers Association. There was further input at later stages.

	5.1.2	An Independent Consultant was assigned to the project on an ongoing basis to enable the Service to benefit from the considerable experiences gained with working with other local authorities and to add an objective, external perspective to the work and direction of the Steering Group.

	5.1.3	Meetings were held with other local authorities to ascertain progress made and share experiences.

	5.1.4	A working party was developed to share best practice with representatives from other Fire Services within our CACFOA region.


6	Methodology

6.1	Benchmarking

	6.1.1	A clear and accurate picture of the duties and responsibilities had been obtained through Job Analysis. This was then rated against pre-determined criteria. A cross selection of posts was selected (20%) from a range of functions and levels for benchmarking purposes. These 'benchmark' posts remained fixed throughout the process, then were amended at the end. They were used to develop local conventions, which were specific to the local demands of that post, for example, where certain aspects were Fire Service specific.

	6.1.2	All information gathered was produced on a matrix so all posts could be cross-referenced by factor and scores during the 'sore thumbing' process used to ensure consistency and accuracy of approach.


6.2	Local Conventions

	Local Conventions give substance to the general aspects of the factors by providing actual examples of what was meant by 'complex' or 'varied'; qualification equivalents; levels of budgetary/resource responsibility in clear bands.

6.3	Job analysts carried out the task of interviewing postholders and line managers to gain a clear and accurate picture of the duties and responsibilities of the post. Each factor was then rated against pre-determined criteria to achieve a total score reported back to the full Steering Group. No decisions were made in isolation and all decisions were subject to the approval of the full Steering Group through discussion and based on evidence produced in this process.

6.4	Moderating Panels

	6.4.1	The ultimate objective is to secure fair and consistent scores for posts. Any variances in the accuracy of interpretation of information, by the post holder, the line manager and the analyst is checked at an early stage and any obvious discrepancies reviewed. Moderating panels, comprising Steering Group members and trade union representatives carried out 'sore thumbing'.

7	Pay Modelling

7.1	This is the process that translates the rank order generated by the Job Evaluation process into a new grading structure. It involves allocating posts, which have been ranked in a points score order, into a series of models based on grades. This illustrates the number of options available in financial terms, as well s actual impact against current grade.

7.2	The trade unions, locally and at regional level, were active partners in achieving the final pay model. It was important that this process was transparent so the complexities and constraints of the process, and the impact of options, could be understood and rationalised.

7.3	It was agreed that HFRS would retain the nationally defined spinal column points (SCP) structure. However, the former grading system (Scales, Senior Officer (SO) and Principal Officer (PO) grades) would be removed and a new banding structure devised. An important influence here was to rationalise the bandwidths. It was agreed that the new grades would have a maximum of 3 spinal column points, and the highest and lowest grades would have 2 spinal column points.

8	Appeals Process

8.1	Appeals for pay and grading is outside the HFRS Grievance Procedure and has a separate appeals mechanism. This is a two-stage approach, the first being an informal 'first stop' meeting with a trained job analyst providing expert advice and information. The formal and final stage is to an Appeal Panel comprising 2 Steering Group members, a trade union representative and chaired by the Personnel manager. Grounds of appeal are clearly defined in the procedure and are the only basis upon which an appeal can be made.

8.2

Of the 128 posts, 49 were appealed and 40 of those were upheld. The relatively low number of appeals may be due to the transparency of the process, the extent of information and advice made available to employees throughout the process, and the training and experience of the in-house job analysts who carried out the process.

9.	Timescale

9.1	HFRS was one of the first Fire Services in the Country to begin the grading review process and has been one of the very first to complete it. Appendix 1 outlines the key project milestones and clearly demonstrates the considerable commitment of time and resources that has been required over 23 months to achieve a final result.

9.2	As a result of the expertise gained, the Service generally, and the Personnel Manager specifically, has been approached on numerous occasions for advice and information by other Fire Services and public sector bodies.


10	Outcome

10.1	Impact on Posts

	10.1.1	The final outcome, at the conclusion of the appeals process was: · 110 posts went up, representing 46.8% of the total number of posts · 5 posts went down, representing 2.1% of the total number of posts · 120 posts remained the same, representing 51.1% of the total number of posts

10.2	Appeals

	10.2.1	Of the total of 128 posts, 49 were appealed (38%). The outcome of the appeals at each stage were: · 4 were resolved at the First Stop Meeting (3%) · 5 went to formal appeal stage and the appeal was not upheld (4%) · 40 appeals were upheld (31%)

10.3	Cost and Budget Provision

	10.3.1	This was not an attempt to save costs but to ensure that posts were consistently and fairly evaluated and graded, recognising their contribution to the organisation, level of responsibility of the post, etc. Budget provision of £190,000 was made for the financial implications of the Pay and Grading Review. This covered the cost of protection of posts which went down; the back pay of posts which went up and the cost of the consultants and training provided. The exercise was achieved within this provision.


11	Positive Benefits to HFRS

11.1	Clarification of Roles and Responsibilities

	11.1.1	The process addressed a number of anomalies regarding the expectations of the job holder and the line manager and enabled an objective assessment to be made of the duties and responsibility of the post, rather than the value of the post being influenced by the capability of the current job holder.

11.2	Job Titles

	11.2.1	The opportunity was taken to review job titles to more accurately reflect the actual role and responsibilities of individual posts and to ensure consistency of application.

11.3	Procedures for Job Evaluation

	A new procedure for the evaluation of jobs (existing or vacancies) in future has been prepared. This procedure will be implemented where a new post is agreed and needs to be evaluated, where there is a re-structuring or where there is a substantial variation to duties requiring a re-grading review. By following this procedure, the objectivity consistency and relativity established by the original grading review process can be maintained together with control of the pay bill.


12	Conclusion

12.1	It has been the experience of other local authorities that such a comprehensive and objective review of all posts challenges previous pre-conceptions and subjectivity around the `value' of particular posts within an organisation. The experience at HFRS has been no exception to this.

12.2	The Job Evaluation Process has resulted in a new pay and grading system which meets the requirements of the Single Status Agreement, is fair and equitable, affordable and valid within the HFRS environment. Some related issues have been addressed during the process, other issues have been highlighted and will be addressed in the future. New procedures have been drawn up to ensure that a fair and consistent method of pay and grading continues for the future. Relations with the unions have been enhanced, and the project has been a good example of effective employee relations in an environment of consultation and partnership working.


13	European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998

13.1	The proposals within this report are compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998. This legislation will have an ongoing contribution in the development of this policy. The exercise took into account the requirements under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

Recommendation

That Members note the report of the Chief Fire Officer.

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.

None

NB The list excludes:

1 Published works

2 Documents that disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act

File name - HFRA Personnel 18 September 2002 - Grading Review of Support Staff Posts.doc

APPENDIX 1

Key Milestones

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Job Analysis

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Job Analysis

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Forming Steering Group

Training Steering Group

Identification of Benchmark Posts

Job Interviews with Benchmark

Post Holders

Evaluation of Benchmark Posts &

Development of Conventions

Finalisation of Local Conventions

Interviews with Remaining Employees

& Evaluation of Posts

Final 'Sore Thumbing' of Results/

Job Ranking

Pay Modeling & Approval of Funding

Preparation of Individual Results

Letters

Issuing of Results

Manning the Help Line

Ballot of Union Members

Conducting First Stop Meetings

Hearing Formal Appeals

Final 'Mop Up' Session

This content is archived