JOB EVALUATION AND OCCUPATIONAL SPECIFIC DISPENSATIONS: A NEW PERSPECTIVE KZN HR CONVENTION 17 SEPTEMBER 2008

1. JOB EVALUATION ANDOCCUPATIONAL SPECIFIC DISPENSATIONS: A NEW PERSPECTIVEKZN HR CONVENTION 17 SEPTEMBER 2008

2. OVERVIEW • DEFINITIONS • OCCUPATIONAL SPECIFIC DISPENSATIONS (OSDs) • JOB EVALUATION: REFINEMENT OF THE EQUATE SYSTEM

3. DEFINITIONS • JOB EVALUATION (JE) • A process aimed at determining relative differences between jobs within an organization by measuring the size or weight of jobs • In SA Public Service JE main determinant of salary attached to specific jobs – facilitate equal pay for work of equal value • OSD • Dispensations for specific occupational categories which include unique salary structures, centrally determined grades and job profiles, career progression opportunities and other employment practices determined by the MPSA

4. OCCUPATIONAL SPECIFIC DISPENSATIONS

5. OSDs: BACKGROUND • Situation post-1999: • Single salary structure applicable to all occupations • Prescribed JE system to determine where jobs slot in salary structure –decentralized application • Personnel Expenditure Review 2006 - key recommendations: • Improve job evaluation and grading practices – to ensure equal pay for work of equal value • Broad occupational differentiation in relation to remuneration - market relatedness • Greater degree of performance related pay • Remuneration and career pathing of professionals, specialists and scarce skills occupations should be prioritized

6. OSDs: BACKGROUND (cont) • Remuneration Policy Framework 2007 – provided for the introduction of OSDs • PSCBC Resolution 1 of 2007 – occupations, details, timeframes, etc

7. ELEMENTS OF OSDs • Aim is to implement customized dispensations for selected occupations to improve departments’ ability to attract and retain skilled employees • Key elements – centrally determined for each occupation: • Unique salary structures • Grading structures and broad job profiles • Career pathing, including grade progression opportunities, based on competencies, experience and performance • Pay progression within the salary levels • Competency requirements per grade/post – qualifications, statutory requirements, experience, etc

8. PRINCIPLES UNDERPINNING OSDs • Remuneration structure specifically tailored for each occupation • Longer salary scales and overlaps between scales (where applicable) to facilitate adequate salary progression for employees who choose to remain in production levels instead of moving into supervisory/managerial posts • Results of job evaluation are taken into account • Implementation do not result in a general increase for all employees

9. PRINCIPLES (Cont.) • Career pathing model – not automatic salary increases but a forward looking plan to systematically increase salaries after pre-determined periods based on specific criteria such as performance, qualification, experience, etc. • Entails progression to higher salary levels without competing for vacancies or promotion to higher vacant posts – qualifying periods and criteria contained in each OSD – also accelerated progression for sustained above average performance • Dual career paths where applicable

10. IMPLEMENTATION OF OSDs • Issued as determination by the appropriate Executive Authority (i.e. by Minister for the Public Service and Administration in respect of Public Service Act employees) once collective agreement is concluded • Apply to all employees in the specific occupation • Deviations only allowed after approval by the appropriate Executive Authority • Employees’ salary positions will not be negatively affected on translation • Impact on JE – less jobs need to be evaluated in future

11. ADVANTAGES OF OSDs • Facilitate recruitment and retention of skills • Improve consistency between departments: • Consistent grading of posts derived from centrally determined benchmark job descriptions and prescribed grading levels – enhances equal pay for work of equal value • Centrally determined salaries attached to each grade • Centrally prescribed skills/competency requirements • Clear career paths and progression opportunities • Curtail job hopping between departments (in the same occupation) • Reward performance • Employees may remain longer at production levels

12. REFINEMENT OF THE EQUATE JOB EVALUATION SYSTEM

13. BACKGROUND • Equate was customized for the Public Service in 1996/97 by KPMG and has been in use since 1999. • Previous investigations into the system: • 2002 - Deloitte and Touché - found Equate to be sound and effective JE system • 2006 - As part of PER PWC recommended that Equate be retained but parts of system need to be refined and updated • Remuneration Policy Framework – Equate to be retained but certain elements of system and process need to be reviewed

14. CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED • Decentralized application • Inconsistencies within/between depts • Compliance with PSR and other prescripts • Lack of monitoring and evaluation mechanism • Time required to evaluate jobs • Elements of current system outdated • Parameters of certain questions • Technology base • Gaps in system • Perceptions about job evaluation: • Should ensure market-related/adequate salaries • Other systems “better”

15. PROJECT TO REFINE THE SYSTEM • Objectives: • Determine whether Equate fully caters for professional and specialist jobs – if not develop proposals to address this • Identify elements in Equate that need to be updated and refined and develop proposals to address this • Determine whether there is justification to utilise a second job evaluation system in the Public Service – if so, recommend appropriate systems and identify jobs to which it should apply

16. PROJECT TO REFINE THE SYSTEM (cont) • Investigate and develop proposals to improve identified parts of the job evaluation process and system: • Creation of a central database of job descriptions and grading results • Consider current overlaps between job weight ranges • Development of proposals on the monitoring and evaluation of job evaluation • Refinement of the existing co-ordination mechanism for upgrading of occupations • Adjust the Equate software as required based on the outcome of the investigation • Consider web-enablement of Equate

17. PROGRESS TO DATE • Service providers appointed • Conducted study using mainly specialists and professional jobs to compare Equate results to results obtained with two other systems, namely Hay and Calibr8. • Departments were approached to submit inputs on JE issues that require attention. • Initial report submitted – main findings: • Equate is sound but needs to be fine-tuned and updated • Equate does not favor administrative and management over specialists/professional jobs (internal equity)

18. PROGRESS TO DATE (Cont) • A number of recommendations were made of which the most important are the following: • Equate to be retained • If another system is to be considered, should only be used in exceptional circumstances and strictly controlled • Regulations to be amended to establish a central quality assurance and standards settings procedure • A benchmark job evaluation database to be established • Expert group sessions to be held to workshop possible changes and/or enhancements of Equate • Communication strategy on job evaluation to be developed • Work on the amendment of the system largely completed – proposed amendments workshopped with departments and provinces • Next steps: • Amendment of rules base and software (including web-enablement) • Implementation of refined system to commence by second quarter of 2009.

19. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF REFINED SYSTEM • Improved consistency in the evaluation and grading of jobs between departments • Quicker and more appropriate evaluations • Improved monitoring and evaluation • Integration with new HR system – improved management information and reporting

20. Thank you