Pay grades and salaries of health professionals

WQ.470/2021

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE CHAIR OF THE STATES EMPLOYMENT BOARD BY DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER

QUESTION SUBMITTED ON MONDAY 22ND NOVEMBER 2021 ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON MONDAY 29TH NOVEMBER 2021

Question

In order that the context may be understood for the increase in November 2017 in pay grades and salaries of 126 health professionals and social workers, subsequently described as "inappropriately uplifted", will the Chair explain the background, in particular –

1. how the decision came about to instruct the pay uplift;
2. who was responsible for signing off this decision;
3. what actions, if any, were taken to correct the error;
4. whether unintended consequences have arisen from this decision and, if so, what;

4. the total cost of this action, up to the present day;
5. any ongoing costs associated with this action;
6. whether or not anyone has been held to account for this matter, and if so, how;

and will he commit to publishing the independent report into this matter commissioned by the Health and Community Services Department at the request of the Unions, and any other related reports either commissioned or published; and if not, why not?

Answer

Answer

A re-evaluation of certain HCS roles was undertaken in 2017. In mid-2018 concerns that had been expressed resulted in an independent review being carried out, which was then presented to the SEB. The contents of the report are public, have been shared with staff and can be accessed via the following link. The SEB were (and remain) fully supportive of the findings of the report and action was taken accordingly.

The answers to each of the Deputy 's questions are below:

1. Concerns were raised in August 2017 by the then Chief Officer (CO) of Health and Social Services Department (HSSD) and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) regarding the impact of the implementation of Workforce Modernisation (WFM). A request was made to the then Employment Relations Director for the re-evaluation of a number of Allied Health Professional (AHP) roles, as identified by the then HSSD Senior Leadership team. Following a number of discussions between senior officers, it was agreed that the roles would be evaluated, this was carried out by Korn Ferry Ltd (Hay).
2. The Director of Employee Relations at the time confirmed that it was their responsibility to sign off this decision as this was business as usual in terms of job evaluation.
3. In 2018, the SEB directed that a full and proper independent evaluation exercise (root cause analysis) must be carried out across all AHP roles. It was determined that the most equitable solution to the issue was to re-evaluate all AHP roles to ensure parity across the whole group. This activity was carried out by a project team who worked closely with officers, Trades Union representatives and colleagues to ensure full transparency. The review also included an appeals procedure to allow colleagues to query their evaluation outcome and discuss aspects of the evaluation process with the aim of ensuring colleagues felt engaged as participants in the process.

4. The key risk issues identified were the lack of acceptance of the outcomes of re-evaluation and the signing of job descriptions, this was mitigated by providing regular updates, escalation points and continued engagement. Sign off sheets and an appeal process was also introduced.
5. The total cost for the project which includes all of the costs was £892,200. This included pay protection costs for the relevant AHPs/SWs from April 2019 to the end of pay protection in March 2022.
6. The ongoing cost associated to this is the pay protection element that ceases March 2022, as identified in e.
7. A root cause analysis was commissioned by the Interim HR Director Health and Social Service Department early June 2018. The purpose of the review was predominantly to establish the facts that led to the decision to evaluate a limited number of AHP posts as business as usual ahead of Work Force Modernisation results being published in early November 2017. Following the root cause analysis, colleagues were held to account, however we are not able to disclose further details.

As noted above, the report can be accessed via the following link