Item 10 Appendix 1
West Dunbartonshire Council · 12 November 2025
Back to Corporate Services Committee — 12 November 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Some pages contain no extractable text. They may be blank, graphics or scanned pages. OCR has not been applied.
Page 1
Job Evaluation Policy & Procedure Appendix 1
Page 2
Quick Reference - Associated Documents and Version Control Title Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure Version Version 4 Amended Responsible Strategic People and Change Manager Committee approval date: November 2023 Consultation with trades unions: July 2025 – October 2025 Supersedes Version Version 3 – approved 19th May 2021 Driver for change Review related to the consistent application of the agreed amended 3rd Edition 2nd Amendment of the Scottish Joint Council Legislative Context Legislation applicable to this Policy and supporting Procedure: The Equality Act 2010 The Equal Pay (Amendment) Regulations 1983 Date for Review As and when required
Page 3
CONTENTS SECTION TITLE Policy PAGE NO 1 Introduction 4 2 Definitions 4 3 Scope 4 4 Key Principles 5 5 Legislative/Policy Framework 5 6 Application of Policy and Procedure 5 7 Roles and Responsibilities 6 8 Review and Monitoring 9 Procedure 1 Introduction 10 2 Context 10 3 Request for Re-evaluation 11 4 Evaluation of New Posts 17 5 Matching 19 6 Job Evaluation Appeal Procedure 20 Appendices 1 Glossary of Terms 23 2 Request for Re-evaluation Flowchart 25 3 Evaluation of New Posts Flowchart 25 4 Appeals Procedure Flowchart 25 5 Review Procedure Flowchart 25
Page 4
Job Evaluation Policy: 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Council implemented the Single Status Agreement in 2009 using the agreed Scottish Joint Councils’ Job Evaluation (SJC) Scheme to evaluate local government employee posts. To maintain the integrity of the Council grading structure, the re-evaluation of changed posts, new posts and appeals will be determined using the SJC Job Evaluation Scheme as applied by the Council. This will ensure the definitions and guidance of all 13 factors of the SJC JE Scheme will be applied consistently to all posts in accordance with the agreed application by the Council set out in this policy and supporting procedure. 1.2 The Council is committed to a fair, open, transparent, and legal compliant approach to the evaluation of posts and ensure equal pay for work of equal value. 2. DEFINITION 2.1 Job Evaluation is defined by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) as “a method for comparing different jobs to provide a basis for a grading and pay structure. Its aim is to evaluate the job, not the jobholder, and to provide a relatively objective means of assessing the demands of a job.” 2.2 The evaluation process will be supported by the CoSLA Gauge+ ‘Evaluator’ software which is an online system to support and speed up steps in the evaluation process and generate a Job Overview document. 3. SCOPE 3.1 This policy applies to all Local Government employees including those formerly known as Craft Workers and Chief Officers. Teachers are excluded as they are covered by the SNCT Job Sizing Scheme. 3.2 The Council will ensure that good equal opportunities practice underpins the operation of this policy irrespective of age; disability; sex; gender re-assignment; race; religion or belief; pregnancy and maternity; marriage and civil partnership; or sexual orientation.
Page 5
4. KEY PRINCIPLES 4.1 The key principles of the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure are to ensure that: The Council provides equality in terms of pay and that our job evaluation processes are fair, open, consistent, and legally compliant. The SJC Job Evaluation Scheme is used to evaluate posts, and it is fit for purpose and supports the Council to provide an objective, rational and reliable measure of the size and significance of each post in relation to other posts within the Council. A robust framework is in place to evaluate posts using factual and objective documentation and allow appeals against evaluation outcomes. Evaluation is undertaken by trained and competent job analysts, who will include independent representatives and representatives from trade unions and human resources. Posts, not people, are evaluated and it does not consider the individual’s performance. 5. LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT/POLICY FRAMEWORK 5.1 Policy and Procedure complies with the Equality Act 2010. 5.2 The Policy and Procedure also complies with ACAS Guidance “Job Evaluation: Consideration and Risks” and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) Job Evaluation Checklists. 5.3 The Policy and Procedure is based on the principles contained within the Scottish Joint Council for Local Government Employees Job Evaluation Scheme’s Practice Manual and Model Job Evaluation Appeal Procedure. 6. APPLICATION OF POLICY AND PROCEDURE 6.1 A separate Job Evaluation Procedure, documentation and flowcharts have been developed to support the application of the Policy.
Page 6
7. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 7.1 To support the application of this policy and procedure, the following roles and responsibilities will apply: Employees Provide all relevant information with their submission to the line manager. Understand that posts can go down as well as up/stay the same and manage expectations accordingly. Must ensure that they have read their current Job Overview Document and Factor Level Listings prior to submitting any request for re-evaluation ensuring that it meets the criteria outlined in 3.3. Ensure that any documentation submitted is accurate, complete, and comprehensive and that they are completed on the standard templates. Provide further clarification and/or attend meetings as requested to assist in providing information on the role(s) being evaluated or completing questionnaires if required. Responsible for attending information gathering sessions, reviews & Job Evaluation Appeals Panels as requested to provide information on the role being evaluated. Managers Responsible for understanding the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure and their role in the process. Consult with their People and Change Partners when considering submitting a job evaluation request, work with them to complete submission and provide the appropriate documentation as required. Ensure that employees have access to their current Role Profile, Job Overview Document and Factor Level Listings and that any request for re-evaluation meets the criteria outlined in Section 3.3 of the policy. Must ensure that role profiles are accurate, complete, and comprehensive and meet the needs of the service and that they are completed on the correct standard template. Responsible for ensuring requests for re-evaluation forms are completed with their comments within the required submission deadlines. Responsible for providing information on duties and responsibilities of the role being evaluated. Responsible for providing information on any significant and permanent changes to existing post. Manage expectations of those submitting requests for re-evaluation, noting posts can go down as well as up/stay same. Provide further clarification and/or attend meetings as requested on the role(s) being evaluated or completing questionnaires if required.
Page 7
Responsible for attending information gathering sessions, reviews and Job Evaluation Appeals Panels as requested to provide information on the post being evaluated. Managers are responsible for providing comment/agreement on initial job overview documents. Managers are responsible for communicating the outcomes of the job evaluation process to the affected postholders and completing associated paperwork to implement any changes. Managers are responsible for agreeing implementation dates and associated processing with HR Connect and Workforce Management, especially for large group changes. People and Change Partners Responsible for understanding the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure and their role in the process. Support and challenge the requirement for additional roles considering the wider context of a joined-up council approach alongside the service and workforce planning priorities. Ensure the Strategic Operating Model (SOM) principles apply to any proposed changes particularly around spans of control/ratios, grade reporting with no more than 6 levels below the Chief Executive. Provide advice and guidance on the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure to managers in relation to developing accurate, complete, and comprehensive role profiles. Ensure that Role Profiles are suitable for submission to the Job Evaluation process and submit posts for evaluation to the appropriate team in accordance with submission deadlines. Ensure that any request for re-evaluation meets the criteria outlined in 3.3 and make comments on any submission. Contribute to the development and review of the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure in line with legislative requirements and good practice. Chief Officer Responsible for understanding the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure and their role in the process. Chief Officers are required to consult with their People and Change Partners when considering a job evaluation request, and work with them to complete submission. Responsible for ensuring requests for re-evaluation forms are completed within the required submission deadlines. Ensure the SOM principles apply to any proposed changes. Must ensure that any request for re-evaluation meets the criteria outlined in 3.3 and note the details of this on all submission. Support and challenge the requirement for additional roles considering the wider context of a joined-up council approach alongside the service and workforce planning priorities. Manage expectations of those submitting requests for re-evaluation, noting that posts can go down as well as up/stay same.
Page 8
Strategic Human Resources Ensure compliance with the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure and ensure the administration of the Job Evaluation process on behalf of the Council, including notification of outcomes to relevant manager(s). Develop and maintain effective documentation and systems to evidence compliance with the policy and procedure, supporting an auditable process. Ensure that those involved at all stages of the evaluation process are provided with adequate training to undertake their role. Ensure adequate resources are available through maintenance of a pool of trained Job Analysts available to participate in the process. Provide advice and guidance to managers in relation to developing accurate, complete, and comprehensive role profiles, and provide advice and guidance to managers in relation to the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure. Lead on the development and review of the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure and supporting documentation in line with legislative requirements and good practice. Consult with Trades Unions on the development and review of the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure in accordance with the terms of the Policy Framework. Job Analysts Maintain confidentiality regarding all aspects of work undertaken and must declare any conflict of interest with any role being evaluated. Responsible for attending training as required and ensuring a full understanding of the Scottish Councils’ Job Evaluation Scheme. Follow the job evaluation procedure as outlined in the policy, procedure and supporting documentation. Responsible for gathering further information on the role(s) being evaluated if required through information gathering session, discussion, email, attending MS Teams or Face to Face meetings with Managers and/or post holders as requested and Questionnaires if required. Trades Unions Contribute, via the consultation process, to the development and review of the Job Evaluation Policy and Procedure Actively support the ongoing training and participation of trade union representatives in the evaluation process. Support their members by providing advice and guidance to employees in relation to the Job Evaluation Policy, Procedure, and process. Support the Job Evaluation process as a Job Analyst or Appeal Panel Member or as an employee representative and not undertaking both roles in relation to a particular post or group of posts. Ensuring branch support of their respective union analysts to protect their continuing involvement.
Page 9
Panel Members of Job Evaluation Appeal Maintain confidentiality regarding all aspects of work undertaken and must declare any conflict of interest with any role being evaluated. Responsible for attending training as required and ensuring a full understanding of the Scottish Councils’ Job Evaluation Scheme. Follow the job evaluation procedure as outlined in the policy, procedure and supporting documentation. Responsible for gathering further information on the role(s) being evaluated if required through discussion, email, attending MS Teams or Face to Face meetings with Managers and/or post holders as requested. Undertaking the role on a regular basis and participate and attend evaluation appeals panels to which they have given a commitment. Council Responsibility to provide a robust job evaluation policy and process to underpin equal pay legislation. Ensure that training is provided for those involved in the job evaluation process and ensure that job evaluation is undertaken in a fair, open, and transparent way. 8. REVIEW AND MONITORING 8.1 The Job Evaluation Policy, Procedure and supporting documentation will be reviewed as required to ensure that it remains fit for purpose and that it is being implemented fairly and consistently. 8.2 Reviews will be undertaken to ensure compliance with legislation, further development of the national scheme and recommended best practice.
Page 10
JOB EVALUATION PROCEDURE INTRODUCTION 1.1 This procedure applies to Local Government employees including those formerly known as Craft Workers and Chief Officers. Teachers are excluded. 1.2 This procedure will assist managers, employees, and Trades Unions through the Job Evaluation process. 1.3 The job evaluation procedure will: 1. Evaluate the post and not the person doing it. 2. Consider the demands of the post. It will not consider the total volume of work, the number of people required to do it or the ability of the postholder. 3. Assume that the post is being/will be performed to an acceptable standard; and 4. Evaluate requests for re-evaluation for a post as it is now, not how it was done previously or may be done in the future. 2. CONTEXT 2.1 This procedure sets out a mechanism to respond to those circumstances which justify a re-evaluation of an existing post, job evaluation of a new post, or a job evaluation appeal. 2.2 Services will be expected to maintain stability in their post grades, and managers must ensure that employees work within the terms of their role profile. Any change in duties which extends beyond an employee’s current role profile should be as a result of an informed decision and agreement of their line manager and Chief Officer, and not as an unplanned consequence of circumstances evolving incrementally. 2.3 The procedure addresses individual requests from employees and/or managers as well as evaluations arising from structure reviews or service specific requirements. 2.4 In terms of structure reviews, the procedure will apply to all posts, not just those directly impacted by the changes. This ensures that factor levels can be checked for any consequential impact(s).
Page 11
3. REQUEST FOR RE-EVALUATION 3.1 Managers and employees can request the re-evaluation of posts that have had a significant and permanent change since the last evaluation, out- with the creation of new posts, restructures, or service reviews. As outlined in paragraph 2.4, all posts will be checked as part of restructures and service reviews to ensure that factor levels remain consistent, accurate and are cognizant of changes to other inter-linked posts. 3.2 Prior to submitting a Request for Re-evaluation form. The manager and/or employee/s must access the current Role Profile (RP), Job Overview Document (JOD) and Factor Level Listings (FFL) for the post from the Global Share Role profile Library. Employees who do not have access to the Global Drive and cannot get the information via their manager, should request their RP, JOD & FLL by emailing the job evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west-dunbarton.gov.uk . This will give the manager and/or the post holder the current assessment of the 13 job evaluation factors. For those employees without access to the electronic request for re- evaluation form or the job evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west- dunbarton.gov.uk ,assistance can be provided by your line manager and/or Trade Union representative. If, after reading the current job overview document, the manager and/or employee/s consider that a significant and permanent change has occurred and the criteria in 3.3 below are met, a request for re-evaluation form can be submitted. Request for Re-evaluation forms can be accessed here. 3.3 Criteria The following criteria require to be met before an application for re- evaluation of an existing post can progress: A minimum period of one calendar year must have elapsed since the latest of the following dates: (i) the effective date of implementation of the current job evaluation outcome; (ii) the date of the appeal outcome. The change in post content must be significant in nature and not solely attributable to an increase in the volume of work performed. A significant change refers to a substantial shift in the duties, responsibilities, or requirements of a role. This may include: New or expanded responsibilities. Increased decision-making authority. Greater task complexity or scope Changes in reporting lines A shift in the nature or focus of the work.
Page 12
An increase in workload alone does not constitute a significant change and will not be accepted. The change is a necessary part of the post remit. The change arises directly from a change in service requirements. The change is permanent. The change must be significant in relation to one or more of the 13 factors outlined in the current job overview document. (Please refer to 3.2 above). It is anticipated that significant and permanent changes will impact on a limited number of factors. Clear evidence of the change can be provided in support of the application for re-evaluation for each factor submitted, including the impact of new duties on existing duties, i.e., what is no longer being done or done to a lesser degree/frequency. The Line Manager agrees that the change in post meets all the above criteria and has provided a detailed response to each of the points within the request for re-evaluation form. Approval 3.4 If the Line Manager (Grade 9 and above) agrees that the criteria above are met in full they should seek approval from the appropriate People & Change Partner and relevant Chief Officer who will authorise the review of the post, subject to para 3.3 above. 3.5 If the Line Manager (Grade 9 and above) disagrees that the change in the post fully meets all the criteria, they will specify the reason on the form and the form will be referred to the relevant Chief Officer for a determination. If the Chief Officer determines that the request for re-evaluation does not meet all the criteria there will be no right of appeal. The employee(s) will be advised accordingly by their line manager, and their request will not proceed any further. This decision is final. 3.6 Advice can be sought from the People, Quality & Governance Lead or Strategic HR Team if Managers or Chief Officers are unclear on any aspects of the 13 factors prior to deciding. 3.7 The procedure is not intended, designed or available for cases where: The request relates to a claim of comparability with another post or employee (either within or out with the Council) or seeks to restore previous differentials or establish parity. The basis for the claim is a residual or ongoing dissatisfaction with the outcome of the original job evaluation exercise or structural review. The request is based on an individual’s opinion as to what the post remit should be (and not supported by the manager).
Page 13
The 3 Stages of submitting a request for re-evaluation form. Stage1 If a manager and/or employee/s believe that there has been a significant and permanent change to their role since it was last evaluated, they can submit a request for re-evaluation form. Where possible this should be done in conjunction with the appropriate line manager (Grade 9 and above). If this is not possible the request for re -evaluation form should be completed by the employee/s and submitted to your line manager (Grade 9 and above) including examples and any supporting documentation. Submissions omitting this detail will be returned to the submitting party. *All employees to be considered within a request for re-evaluation must be explicitly named or position number(s) referenced within the submission form. This requirement ensures fairness, transparency, and compliance with equal pay legislation. Under the Scottish Joint Council (SJC) Job Evaluation Scheme. Evaluations are based on the actual duties and responsibilities performed not merely the post title. While employees may share the same post title, their roles may differ significantly in scope, level of responsibility, or working conditions. Naming all postholders ensures that the evaluation accurately reflects the full range of duties associated with the post and that all affected postholders are treated equitably. Stage 2 Where an employee completes the request for re-evaluation independently, the form will still go to the line manager (Grade 9 and above) and/or employee/s to complete the request for re-evaluation together, the manager (Grade 9 and above) will receive the request for re-evaluation form. They will have 21 days from receiving receipt of the form to complete, comment and submit. As above, stage 1 & 2 should be completed jointly by the manager and employee/s where possible and should include examples and any supporting documentation including an updated role profile outlining the significant and permanent change(s). In most cases where there has been a significant and permanent change, the role profile should be updated by the line manager and should accompany the submission. In some instances, the line manager may submit the request for re- evaluation because of significant and permanent changes to the role. This will be discussed with any employee(s) affected by the change prior to submission. E.G. The SSSC stipulation that a post-holder is qualified to HND level to practice competently/safely. The current Role Profile states HNC as the essential criteria. The role profile should be updated to require a HND as the
Page 14
essential requirement. This should be done through discussion with the employee(s) in the role and only in circumstances where the change is necessary. A request for re-evaluation should be submitted. E.G. A role has currently been assessed as having responsibility for employees and this is no longer a requirement. The role profile should be updated to reflect this change. This should be done through discussion with the employee(s) in the role and a request for re evaluation form should be submitted. Stage 3 Managers (Grade 9 and above) should discuss all requests for re-evaluation with the appropriate People & Change Partner and Chief Officer to understand the organisational implication of any potential change. This is to ensure the Strategic Operating Model (SOM) and Organisational Planning principles are applied. The Chief Officer will then sign comment and submit the completed request for re-evaluation form to the job evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west-dunbarton.gov.uk. Documentation 3.8 Where supported, the completed ‘Re-evaluation Request Form’ and Role Profile should be signed by the Chief Officer. Until the Chief Officer approves the form, the submission is not considered complete and will not be scheduled for evaluation. Once completed, the ‘Re-evaluation Request Form’ including all supporting documentation will be submitted to the job evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west-dunbarton.gov.uk for the post to be reviewed by the job analysts as part of the evaluation. It should be completed as fully as possible including the post title, the employee/s name/s and examples including any relevant documentation. It is important to note that only the employees named within the request for re- evaluation request will have the outcome applied. Submissions without names will be returned. Submission 3.9 Requests for re-evaluation of posts to take account of significant and permanent changes will be processed when approved by the Chief Officer. Written acknowledgement of the submission of a completed proforma in support of a request for re-evaluation will be provided to the postholder within 10 working days.
Page 15
Evaluation 3.9.1 Re-evaluation requests will be evaluated in line with the procedure outlined from section 3.1 to section 3.9.8 3.9.2 Employees submitting re-evaluation requests may be required to provide further clarification and/or attend information gathering sessions with the Job Analysts. Their Line Manager may also be required to provide further clarification and/or attend information gathering sessions. 3.9.3 Employees may also be required to provide further information or invited to attend information gathering sessions with Job Analysts for requests submitted by their Line Manager in relation to their post. 3.9.4 To maintain a fair and accurate evaluation process, line managers must review and comment on all initial Job Overview Documents. This can be done with the postholder(s) or on their behalf. Their input ensures the document is factually correct and complete. In roles with multiple postholders, the manager can verify that the JOD represents the common core duties of the role, avoiding discrepancies that could lead to inconsistent evaluation outcomes. Job evaluation decisions are based on the information in the JOD. Managerial agreement provides assurance that the content is objective, evidence-based, and not exaggerated or understated. Manager comments can provide context or clarification that helps HR, and the Job Analysts understand the role’s scope, especially where duties are complex. Approval 3.9.5 If the re-evaluation results in a change to the grade, the line manager must complete the online ‘Establishment Change – Post Amendment’ form to update the grade of the post on their establishment. The form will then proceed through the online approval route to the appropriate People and Change Partner, Finance Business Partner and finally the Chief Officer - People & Technology. An online Achieve form will also need to be completed to action the change for the employee – this should also be completed by the Line Manager. Effective Date 3.9.6 The effective date of application of any increase as a result of a request for re-evaluation will be the date of receipt of the submission of the completed and approved request form signed by the appropriate Chief Officer. Subject to their agreement and suitable rationale, placement may be escalated. If the outcome of a request for re- evaluation results in a decrease, the effective date will be 21 days after the final outcome is issued. In this circumstance the SWITCH policy will apply (see 3.8).
Page 16
3.9.7 The employee will normally be placed on the first point of the new grade if there is an increase. If the outcome is a decrease they will be placed on the highest point of the new grade. Any deviation from this must be discussed with the Chief Officer, People & Technology. Right of Appeal 3.9.8 The manager and employee have the right to appeal the outcome of the request for re-evaluation, subject to 6.1.
Page 17
4 EVALUATION OF NEW POSTS A new post will be defined as any new post or any post within a restructure, or service review will also be considered as a new post to ensure any changes since the previous evaluation are captured. All role profiles will be updated to reflect the current responsibilities and duties and sent to job evaluation for assessment. Documentation 4.1 Strategic HR Job Analyst will either match to an existing outcome or evaluate the post and provide an indicative outcome where a match has not been possible to the Chief Officer. The provisional outcome will be provided to allow the following information to be entered via the online ‘Establishment Change – New Post’ form to add the new post to the establishment on the agreed date of implementation. 4.2 When a Service seeks to establish a new post or make any changes to posts as part of a restructures, or service reviews or new project, the Service (in consultation with their People and Change Partner and signed by the Chief Officer) must submit a New Post form including a copy of the role profile, including person specification and details as to the background of the post and why it is being created to the job evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west- dunbaton.gov.uk for assessment in the first instance. Approval 4.3 When the request for an additional post in the establishment has been approved by the appropriate People and Change Partner, Finance Business Partner, Chief Officer and the Chief Officer - People & Technology, notification will be sent to Job Evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west- dunbarton.gov.uk that the post requires to be evaluated. Evaluation 4.4.1 Once the completed and approved documentation is submitted to the job evaluation mailbox jobevaluation@west-dunbarton.gov.uk , in the first instance a trained Strategic HR job analysts will assess if there is a potential match to an existing outcome as outlined in section 5 below. If there is no potential match, arrangements will be made to evaluate the post. 4.4.2 In circumstances when a match cannot be found, the Job Evaluation assessment will be carried out by a trained Strategic HR Job Analyst and two Job Analysts, where possible this will consist of a Trade Union Analyst and an independent Analyst both out-with the submitted post service to ensure there are no conflicts of interest. The Analysts may require further information from the manager to complete the evaluation. To ensure clarity, services will be notified at this point in the process.
Page 18
4.4.3 The national online job evaluation system (CoSLA Gauge+ ‘Evaluator’ software) will be used to undertake the evaluation along with submitted documentation and information obtained through information gathering sessions, discussion and/or correspondence with the manager. 4.4.4 The CoSLA Gauge+ ‘Evaluator’ software will measure the post in line with the responses given and a Job Overview Document and Factor Levels Listing will be generated. 4.4.5 No indication of an outcome will be provided until the evaluation has been subject to a consistency check. 4.4.6 A consistency check is conducted by Strategic HR to ensure that the evaluation is accurate and consistent with existing evaluated posts across the Council to avoid anomalies. The consistency check is conducted by reviewing the outcome in line with hierarchies, reporting lines, subordinates, equivalent and higher graded posts within the relevant structure and across the Council ensuring the SOM Principles and local Guidance are applied. Any consistency issues identified by Strategic HR will go back to the Strategic HR Job Analyst and two Job Analyst for agreement. 4.4.7 The Manager is provided with the initial Job Overview Document for comment/agreement. 4.4.8 A further consistency check is conducted by Strategic HR based on any comments provided by the Manager to ensure that the outcome captures the responsibilities and duties of each post and the Manager is issued with the final outcome. 4.4.9 For all new posts there shall be an implementation date when the post will become live. This includes posts as part of a restructures, or service reviews review or new project, The effective date of application of the revised grade for a new post will be the implementation date agreed by the appropriate Chief Officer. 4.4.10If after 6 months or more of operation of the new post, it is felt that the demands of the post have not been captured accurately, a review will be considered by the original Strategic HR Job Analysts or the People, Quality & Governance Lead Their decision is final.
Page 19
5. MATCHING / CONSIDERATION OF ROLES AGAINST ROLES THAT ALREADY EXIST 5.1 The agreed Scottish Joint Council for Local Government Employees Job Evaluation Scheme and associated CoSLA Gauge+ ‘Evaluator’ software is used in conjunction with the agreed job evaluation process to provide job evaluation outcomes for all posts past and present within West Dunbartonshire Council. This has resulted in a number of agreed job evaluation outcomes within the Gauge system which have been subject to the full job evaluation process. Any approved submission for job evaluation should always be considered by Strategic HR for a possible match to an existing outcome. This could be matching to a benchmark post, generic post and, in some circumstances, a unique post although this will be rare. 5.2 Matching to a benchmark Post Strategic HR can assess the potential match to either a previous role profile, or the Job Overview Document resulting from the benchmark outcome. This can be used as a basis for ‘matching’ other jobholders to a benchmark post. 5.3 Matching to a Generic Post Strategic HR can assess the potential match to a generic outcome. The term ‘generic’ also applies to posts that are broadly similar in terms of the nature of the work undertaken by a group of postholders, but which vary in terms of the day to day detail of the tasks carried out by individual postholders, for example, Clerical Assistant, Administrative Officer ‘Generic evaluations’ cover a range of similar posts because the job evaluation scheme assesses the predominant demand under various factor headings and this is likely to be the same even though the tasks involved in specific posts may vary. 5.4 Matching to a Unique Post Strategic HR can assess the potential match to a unique outcome. Most unique posts are just that, unique and will require an individual outcome. However, posts like project officer or project manager which may be unique to the service yet are broadly similar in terms of nature of the work and predominant demands could be considered a match. 5.5 Assimilation The assimilation of each individual postholder to the Council’s LGE Grading and Pay structure requires an evaluation outcome for their post. However, it will not be necessary for every individual postholder to go through the whole evaluation process.
Page 20
6. JOB EVALUATION APPEAL PROCEDURE Grounds of Appeal 6.1 Employees and managers have a right of appeal against the outcome of the evaluation or re-evaluation on one or more of the following grounds: There is factual inaccuracy in either the inputs or the outputs of the evaluation process. The job evaluation process was not conducted in accordance with the Council’s Job Evaluation procedure. There has been a misapplication of the factor definitions, levels, and guidance of the Scottish Councils’ Single Status Job Evaluation Scheme. 6.2 Appeals on the grounds of comparability with other posts (either within the individual Council, other Councils or nationally) or appeals seeking to restore previous grading or pay differentials will be inadmissible. Timescale 6.3 Appeals against the outcome of the evaluation or re-evaluation must be submitted to HR within 21 calendar days of the date of written notification of the evaluation outcome. 6.4 Receipt of submitted appeals should be acknowledged in writing within 10 working days. 6.5 The Council will endeavor to determine the outcome of Job Evaluation appeals within 3 calendar months. Documentation 6.6 Appeals must be submitted on the ‘Appeal against Evaluation/Re- evaluation Outcome’ form and submitted along with all supporting documentation upon which the appeal relies. 6.7 Appeal submissions must identify the factors being appealed and detail the case under each of the relevant factor headings. This should be new information and not a resubmission of examples from role profiles, information gathering session and/or JOD check as this will already have been considered. 6.8 An appeal will be deemed inadmissible if: It is not in line with the grounds for appeal, detailed at 6.1. No evidence relevant to the factor(s) being appealed has been submitted. The evidence relates to increased volume of work rather than a change to the Factor Definitions and Scores; or The evidence is based on comparison with other employees; or
Page 21
The submission is based solely on wording directly lifted from the Job Evaluation Scheme without any examples to demonstrate the responsibility quoted. Job Evaluation Appeal Panel Constitution 6.9 The Job Evaluation Appeal Panel where possible will comprise of 3 Job Analysts: an independent analyst, a Trades Union analyst, and an HR analyst. Where possible, none of these panel members should have been involved with the original evaluation of the post and must be out with the submitting service. Process 6.10 Individual appeal submissions must identify: The grounds of appeal. The factor assessments being appealed against. The appellant’s case under each of the relevant factor headings. The views of the relevant line manager, and/or the next line manager as appropriate, in relation to the factual content of the job and the accuracy of the appellant’s case. 6.11 Arrangements will be made for the written appeal submission to be considered by Strategic People & Change Manager or a nominated People and Change partner (as appropriate) with the support of a trained Job Analyst without the presence of the individual or their manager to: Determine whether there are admissible grounds for the appeal. Identify any matters requiring further investigation or further information; and Identify any non-job evaluation issues out with the remit of the Job Evaluation process, for referral to the relevant People and Change Partner. 6.12 The considerations will focus on the Factors appealed but may also include other Factors referred to during the process. 6.13 The possible outcomes of this initial consideration are: That the appeal has not been substantiated and will be rejected or The appeal has been substantiated in full or in part and will be heard by a Job Evaluation Appeal Panel. 6.14 Employees or Managers will be advised of the outcome of the appeal, including reasons within 10 working days of the consideration meeting. 6.15 The decision is final; therefore, there is no further right of appeal.
Page 22
6.16 Where it is determined that the case should be heard by a Job Evaluation Appeal Panel, the necessary arrangements will be made, and the employee and their Line Manager will be advised. 6.17 Appellants may be accompanied by their Trade Union representative if they choose. 6.18 Appellants will have 10 minutes to present their case after which they may be questioned by members of the Panel for no more than 10 minutes. 6.19 Once the case has been presented, the Job Evaluation Appeal Panel will consider the information presented and re-evaluate in line with the procedure detailed from section 4.3 to section 4.9 of this procedure if applicable. 6.20 The appeal outcome will be decided upon by the Job Evaluation Appeal Panel from the following options: Upheld in full or part - the case was well founded in fact and supported by agreed evidence will be referred to Strategic HR for review and updated in Gauge+ as appropriate. Rejected - the case was not well founded. 6.21 The manager and/or employee will be advised in writing after the Appeal Panel and, where requested, feedback will be given by the Chair of the Panel. 6.22 There is no further right of appeal after the Job Evaluation Appeal Panel.
Page 23
Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms Several terms are used within the Policy and Procedure and these terms are explained in detail below: Job Evaluation Robust, fair, open, and transparent process of determining the value of a post using the SJC JE Scheme and achieving and maintaining grading structures which satisfy the principle of equal pay for work of equal value. Role Profile A factual written account of the purpose, major tasks, and main activities conducted by a post holder or several post holders. Person Specification Job Overview Document An extension of the Role Profile. It is a profile of the ideal person for the post, listing the criteria necessary to do the post. The computerised job evaluation system (CoSLA Gauge ‘Evaluator’ software) produces a Job Overview Document as a summary of the information captured during the evaluation process. This is different in style and content from job profiles and person specifications. Job Evaluation Process of systematically identifying the critical elements of the post, the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities and other personal characteristics required by the way of Role Profiles, Person Specifications, Job Evaluation Request Form and Interview to determine the evaluation outcome of the post using the SJC JE Scheme. Job Analysts Group of trained and impartial evaluators, comprising of independent trained council officers, trade unions and human resources who undertake the job evaluation process.
Page 24
Job Evaluation Appeal Panel Benchmark Post Unique Jobs Generic Job Matching Information Gathering Session Additional scrutiny applied where a manager or post holder(s) feels that the evaluation is incorrect. The panel comprises of independent trained council officers, trade unions and human resources. Benchmark posts are those chosen in the initial part of a job evaluation exercise to form part of a representative sample of the whole job population and are generally posts undertaken by large numbers of postholders, for example, Refuse Collector, Cleaner. Individuals considered as a potential ‘match’ to a benchmark post will generally be doing the same post as the benchmark jobholder. Unique jobs, also referred to as ‘singleton’ posts, are those generally undertaken by only one single individual within the organisation as a whole, for example, Biochemist, Piano Tuner. It is therefore unlikely that any other individual jobholders can be ‘matched’ to these jobs. Generic jobs are similar to benchmark jobs in that they are undertaken by more than one individual jobholder doing broadly similar work, but they did not form part of the benchmark sample of jobs. In such cases, this group of jobs may be referred to as a ‘secondary’ benchmark, because they are undertaken by smaller groups of jobholders doing exactly the same job and it is therefore possible to ‘match’ other individuals to the job undertaken by the jobholder who goes through the evaluation process, for example, Switchboard Operator, Dog Warden. It is not necessary for every individual post holder to go through the job evaluation process. A post can be matched to an existing job evaluation outcome which has been agreed and has subject to the whole job evaluation process. These are posts which are broadly similar in terms of the nature of the work undertaken by a group of post holders but vary in terms of the day-to-day detail of the tasks carried out by individual post holders, for example, Clerical Assistant, Administrative Officer. In these cases, it is possible to produce a benchmark or generic evaluation covering a range of similar jobs because the job evaluation scheme assesses the predominant demand under various factor headings and this is likely to be the same even although the tasks involved in specific posts may vary. Meeting either face to face or on MS Teams with Postholder/s and/or, Line Managers, Strategic HR and Job Analysts to gather information relating to a post to provide the Job Analysts with the responsibilities and duties of a post to allow an accurate assessment based on the information provided.
Page 25
Appendix 2 Request for Re-evaluation Flowchart Appendix 2 Request for reevaluation.xlsx Appendix 3 Evaluation of New Posts Flowchart Appendix 3 Evaluation of New Posts.xlsx Appendix 4 Appeal Procedure Flowchart Appendix 4 Job Evaluation Appeal Process.xlsx Appendix 5 Review of a New Post Appendix 5 Review of a New Post.xlsx
Page 26
No embedded text on this page.