Decision details

The Secretary to the Employer’s Side submitted a report setting out changes to the Job Evaluation Policy, which had been last reviewed in July 2011.  The policy had been reviewed following feedback gained from the Job Evaluation Panel, Unison and suggestions made via the Here to Help programme.  A summary of the main findings of the review were set out in the report now submitted.  The Secretary to the Employer’s Side explained that revisions had been made to ensure transparency of decision making and a consistent approach to the process. 

The Secretary to the Staff Side acknowledged the importance of the Job Evaluation process and supported the need to keep the process “in house”.  He expressed concern that last year, the process had been breached in that the Council had employed external evaluators in relation to a senior management structure involving the appointment of new Heads of Service and that Unison had been advised that the process had been externalised because of a “conflict of interest”.  The Secretary to the Staff Side stated that the Council was recruiting new Heads of Service without consultation with Unison and that Unison should be consulted to evaluate why a Head of Service post was being recruited when lower graded jobs were not being filled.

The Secretary to the Employer’s Side explained that the Job Evaluation Panel would now decide whether posts needed to go out for external evaluation.  Councillor J Ranger stated that sometimes, external evaluation was necessary in order to gain particular expertise which could not be provided “in house”.  The current process whereby Directors or Heads of Service made a business case to Corporate Management Team (CMT) before recruiting was explained.  

The Secretary to the Employer’s Side suggested that paragraph 3.2 be amended by the insertion of “by the Panel” after “evaluation”.  This was supported.

The Chairman stated that the new policy would clarify the process, make it fairer and more transparent. 

The Secretary to the Staff Side sought assurances that the policy would be adhered to.  This was provided. 

The Secretary to the Staff Side expressed concern regarding the wording of paragraph 4.5 of the policy regarding evaluators and suggested that the second sentence be deleted.  This was supported. 

The Secretary to the Staff Side referred to paragraph 5.10 and suggested that to support transparency of decision making, a form be adapted to reflect the Panel’s decision when no unanimous agreement had been reached.  This was supported. 

The Panel recommended approval of the report, as amended.

RECOMMENDED – that the Job Evaluation Policy as now amended, be approved.