Job Evaluation Process – Request for Resource

Job Evaluation Process – Request for Resource. This process is designed to introduce a new job evaluation scheme in a series of stages with the first being its application for the evaluation of new posts approved for recruitment.

30/10/2024

Graeme Stephen

Jennifer Russell

None required.

A scheme and system of analytical job evaluation is a fundamental cornerstone to determine the relative worth of a role within an organisation and therefore supports the justification of pay levels for each defined role. The policy, represents the commencement of the implementation of a new scheme of evaluation for SEPA called the ‘Job Evaluation and Grading Support’ scheme (JEGS). The implementation is to be completed in stages with the first being the application of JEGS for any new post approved for recruitment. Additional stages will be introduced and this EqHRIA updated accordingly.

SEPA’s Equality Outcomes 2022-2026

· Outcome 1 – We have increased the number of people from currently underrepresented groups in our applicants, our staff and those who progress within the organisation.

· Outcome 2 – People with lived experience of inequality, related to a protected characteristic or socioeconomic status, access and use SEPA’s services without barriers.

· Outcome 3 – Staff with lived experience of inequality and barriers, and with a wide variety of needs, feel listened to and respected as SEPA meets those needs.

· Outcome 4 – We have decreased our gender pay gap and occupational segregation related to gender, disability, and ethnicity.

A process of analytical job evaluation contributes to Outcome 4 namely the decrease in our gender pay gap. Job Evaluation of itself does not necessarily achieve this, but is a key process in determining roles rated as equivalent and therefore provide evidence to report and investigate the gender pay gap.

Not for this stage of the implementation process. The new JE process will initially only apply to new posts for recruitment to determine the appropriate pay grade. This EqHRIA will be expanded as additional phases of the project are confirmed. At these later stages, the policy will increase in significance.

Applicants for new roles will be impacted by the application of JEGS to confirm the salary level applicable.

The main sources of information have been:

1. The Job Evaluation Process – Request for Resource.

2. Data compiled for the testing of the standard JEGS scheme.

3. Data from an exercise to tailor the JEGS ‘handbook’ for SEPA application.

4. Data extracted from a benchmark evaluation activity for 70 representative roles across SEPA.

5. Data from the development of a ‘classification guide’ and preparation of job evaluation process for the adoption of JEGS.

In relation to the above see Q3.7 for more detail.

An analytical job evaluation scheme provides a foundation of equal pay assurance. In applying appropriate and fair procedures, the setting of pay for a role is underpinned by a robust methodology. Analytical job evaluation schemes use specific criteria to evaluate jobs. This helps ensure that roles are assessed based on their actual demands rather than subjective opinions.

The proposed JEGS scheme is designed to be gender-neutral, meaning we evaluate the value of roles without bias towards the gender typically associated with those roles.

JEGS supports the application of a fair and equitable pay structure by ensuring that roles of equal value are paid on an equivalent basis. This helps in maintaining employee morale and reducing turnover by fostering a sense of fairness and equity within the organisation subject to processes being transparent and understood.

· Eliminate unlawful conduct

· Advance equality of opportunity

· Foster good relations

The introduction of a new scheme of job evaluation will advance equality of opportunity. This will be promoted in the way the scheme is implemented. Our intention is to integrate the new job evaluation scheme with necessary behaviours and skills for defined roles. This way, a greater degree of transparency can be demonstrated thus promoting clarity of opportunity.

At this stage, Sex (Gender) will be the most relevant characteristic. Additional protected characteristics may be impacted in due course indirectly, but the fundamental purpose of job evaluation is to support considerations of Equal Pay and therefore the impact on the gender pay gap.

Sex (Gender). It has been important throughout that a reasonable balance of representation by gender has been embedded throughout and will continue to be as the job evaluation process extends in scope.

SEPA has a long-standing application of job evaluation directly related to the pay scales and bands applied. The impact that the new job evaluation scheme is likely to be neutral to equality matters with the benefits of application being related to transparency and ease of application. In other words, the transition to a new scheme reflects the progress made by SEPA to date in combating the gender pay gap but derives benefits on-going for improved clarity and transparency for how decisions are made for the setting of pay for roles.

No

N/A

The development of a new job evaluation scheme for SEPA has been in place for several years although impacted by both pandemic and other organisational events.

SEPA has operated a bespoke scheme of evaluation since c.2006 and whilst the scheme itself is valid for confirming roles to be rated as equivalent under the Equal Pay Act, the associated processes present excessive bureaucracy and a blockage to support the necessary transformational change SEPA is required to deliver. As a result, and following a formal invitation to tender exercise, a contract was awarded for the provision of the ‘Job Evaluation and Grading Support’ scheme or JEGS to a combined submission by Willis Towers Watson and Beamans Consulting in May 2022.

The scheme has been prepared for adoption via a series of phases:

1. Testing of the standard JEGS scheme via desktop evaluation of sample roles.

2. Tailoring of the JEGS ‘handbook’ for SEPA application.

3. Benchmark evaluation activity for 70 representative roles across SEPA.

4. The development of a ‘classification guide’ and preparation of job evaluation process for the adoption of JEGS.

The following provides additional context to each stage:

1. Testing of the standard JEGS scheme.

A sample of 42 nominated role holders were invited to participate in a test evaluation process for the standard JEGS scheme. A wide range of roles were identified to participate across all current pay scales and portfolio areas. 

Nominees were requested to represent each role and the following represents the gender breakdown of participation: 

Table 1: Roles nominated for test evaluation by gender. 

The gender mix of nominees was 25 female and 17 male which is 59% female and 41% male. This compares to an overall organisational proportion of 57% female and 43% male as reported in the Equality Mainstreaming Report 2023. 

This testing activity confirmed that the scheme was appropriate for SEPA application in principal. 

2. Tailoring of the JEGS ‘handbook’ for SEPA application. 

The testing confirmed the JEGS scheme as being appropriate for SEPA application. However, some documentation materials required to be set into a SEPA context via modification of the JEGS ‘handbook’ for use by fully trained job analysts. The handbook clarifies how to interpret evaluation statements for SEPA but does not change the underlying system algorithm for role evaluation. 

A Technical Working Group was convened as a sub-group of the joint management and UNISON JE governance oversight committee the ‘Job Evaluation Leadership Group’ (JELG).  This working group comprised seven JEGS trained members of SEPA staff comprised four male and three female members from across the business. 

Supported by our external consulting partners, Beamans to ensure any revised handbook retained JEGS integrity, the group concluded handbook revisions which were subsequently ratified by JELG. 

The finalised scheme of evaluation and associated handbook were applied to a benchmark evaluation exercise. A selection of 71 roles from all areas of SEPA at all relevant pay grades covered by our recognition and procedure agreement were identified for evaluation as follows. 

Table 3: Benchmark evaluation analysis by Gender as at 31 March 2023. 

The benchmark selection was broadly reflective of the overall gender mix across the portfolio and pay band profile for the entire organisation. 

The evaluation activity was completed by a group of fully trained Job Analysts both internally resourced and via Beamans consulting. The process included: 

1. Completion of an evidence gathering form by the appropriate nominee (a Job Analysis Form). 
2. A job evaluation discussion with two trained Job Analysts. 
3. The agreement to an output ‘job profile’ compiled by a trained Job Analyst and agreed by the nominee and line manager. 
4. Evaluation scoring by a trained Job Analyst not involved in the development of the job profile. 
5. Validation by the Technical Working Group (as convened for handbook tailoring above). 
6. Ratification by the Job Evaluation Leadership Group.

On conclusion of the process, and following the completion of the evaluation activity, a total of 70 benchmark roles were evaluated.  The outcomes were subject to a process of ratification via the JELG and a summary of these is as follows: 

Table 4: Benchmark evaluation JEGS scores. 

 The benchmark outcomes presented a close correlation between current pay grades and evaluation outcomes.  

The JE Leadership Group undertook a pay modelling analysis to confirm that as a result of the close correlation of JEGS evaluated roles to current pay band, the JEGS points to grade relationship can be confirmed as follows: 

Table 5: JEGS Points to Grade Relationship 

Of the 70 benchmark roles evaluated, 69 would retain their current pay band position. The one role which did not, is gender mixed in occupancy with two female to one male. This is considered not be a material for the implementation of the scheme.  

On this basis, JELG confirmed that the evaluation data gathered could be used to develop a ‘classification guide’ for future evaluation purposes which presents key role characteristics by pay band level under the JEGS scheme. 

4.    The development of a ‘classification guide’ and initial job evaluation process for the adoption of JEGS.  

The data gathered via the benchmark evaluation exercise was considered by a working group convened to include Senior Leadership representation from across SEPA in conjunction with Beamans consulting and our internal JE team to develop a ‘Classification Guide’. This guide presents key characteristics of roles at each pay band extracting data from the benchmark sample and the JEGS handbook. 

The group comprised 8 Senior Managers, 5 Male and 3 Female representatives. 

The guide was developed in iterative sessions and ratified by the JELG. 

The guide represents a key reference document for future evaluation activity as outlined in the Job Evaluation Process – Request for Resource. 

Due to the close correlation between evaluated roles and their current pay grade, SEPA has confidence that we may transition to using the JEGS scheme in stages with minimal Equal Pay risks and replace our current scheme. The first phase is to apply JEGS to all new posts approved for recruitment.  

Later phases will be developed and the policy extended to cover the wider implementation of JEGS.  

Option 1: No major change

Your assessment demonstrates that the policy or practice is robust. The evidence shows no potential for:

•    less favourable treatment of particular groups, indirect discrimination, victimisation, harassment, and that you have taken all opportunities to advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations; nor 
•    restriction of Convention rights or freedoms.

The policy or practice builds in reasonable adjustments where these may be needed. In reaching this conclusion, you should document the reasons why and the evidence used to support your decision.

The EqHRIA is a living document and should be reviewed and updated to ensure you have captured the changes that have been made because of the implementation of your policy or practice. Set a realistic goal for you to check back in with your assessment, to see if things are going the way you expected.

 Date for the Equality and Human Rights Impact Assessment review. 

31/03/2025
 

28/11/2024 

Yes