People and Culture Review: Response of the States Employment Board

States Employment Board

States Employment Board Response to the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel: People and Culture Review

S.R.12/2021 Res.

Contents

Executive Summary

The People and Culture Review undertaken by the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel (the Panel), is part of their remit to scrutinise the structure, strategy, policies, and procedures of States Entities, and is welcomed. In particular, the level of interest shown along with the desire and commitment to see improvements. The opportunity to share the significant progress already made in many of these areas is similarly appreciated, as is the opportunity to work on fresh recommendations made by the Panel where objective and independent insight has identified further areas for improvement.

The Panel's report seeks to review the effectiveness of the States Employment Board; the People Strategy, the use of independent advisors and consultants by States entities; the application and outcome of relevant policies and procedures and the impact of its target operating model and One Gov initiative to ascertain how all the components combine to influence workplace culture.

This report provides a comprehensive response and outlines the work being carried out in People and Corporate Services on behalf of the organisation in response to the 41 findings and 24  improvement  recommendations  made.  Each  has  been  assessed  in  detail  for  factual, evidential, and contextual relevance. The areas where objective and independent insight has identified  additional  evidence-based  areas  for  improvement  are  welcomed  and  those recommendations are accepted. This report details the plans being taken to take forward on these recommendations, and indeed expand further on some.

Equally some of the findings and subsequent recommendations were found to be either factually or evidentially inaccurate. This may be in part due to a lack of wider context, appreciation of prior work being in place or actions already well advanced. For example, there is no reference in the Scrutiny report to the Covid-19 pandemic, the timescales, business continuity needs and the impact that providing a whole organisation response to best managing the pandemic has had on progressing business objectives. Some of the findings draw conclusions that, if seen with the context of the situation, would lead to a different outcome, or may not necessarily correlate. The Board are seeking to implement an approach of evidence-based decision- making, and therefore some conclusions based on perceptions may not necessarily be borne out by the information available.

Where the recommendations are either deemed as appropriate for closure as already acted upon, or are rejected, this report details the rationale. We have also noted where we agree with the recommendations, these actions were already identified by the Board as actions to be taken.

Summary of Recommendations and Findings

Table 1a. Summary of Recommendations considered by the Board. Appendix 1 provides a more detailed breakdown of this position.

Table 1b. Summary of Findings considered by the Board

States Employment Board

Role and Operation of the States Employment Board

The Board is the employer of all public employees in Jersey and is responsible for employees' terms and conditions. The Board regularly holds scheduled meetings to discuss matters of legal privilege or personal contractual matters. There are 8 key findings and 7 recommendations in the Panel's report related to the Role and Operation of the States Employment Board.

Key Finding 1 (Not agreed)

The States Employment Board have not provided minutes to Scrutiny since November 2019. Despite an indication being provided to the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel that they would be forthcoming; the Chair of States Employment Board has since confirmed that the minutes will not be provided.

Recommendation 1 (Rejected)

The States Employment Board minutes from November 2019 to date must be provided immediately to the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel and then on a regular quarterly basis to the Panel to ensure the actions of Government are subject to scrutiny.

The minutes of the States Employment Board are largely subject to the exemptions under the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011. Exemptions are classified as Absolute Exemption' or Qualified Exemption', such exemptions will include (but are not limited to):

Absolute Exemptions

• Personal information: discussion of a particular case, cases or complaints identifying individual employees or members of the public or containing personal information.

• Court information: information provided to or from the Courts in respect of the duties of the States Employment Board. This would arise particularly in defending or considering charges or cases brought within the Courts and Tribunals.

Qualified Exemptions

• Advice from a Crown Officer, Law Officer or those covered by legal privilege: this arises when  considering  matters  of  legal  procedure,  liability,  claims  or  proceedings  or contractual matters for which legal advice is sought.

• Commercial interests: this includes situations where the Board consider pay awards and terms and conditions of employment, industrial disputes, responses to potential claims and liabilities.

• Formulation  of  public  policy:  The  Board  consider  matters  of  public  policy  and administration, which in development allows for input and discussion about the Board's policies, or those under consultation.

• Employment matters: This would arise where disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice  pay  or  conditions  negotiations,  including  trade  union  relationships, negotiations directions or disputes.

Board minutes would need to be heavily redacted to the point of not being useful, redacting the minutes would require significant administrative time. The Panel have the opportunity to ask questions of the Board and do so through their letters to the Chair of the Board and through regular Scrutiny Panel meetings with Board members.

The Board publishes an Annual Report which provides a summary of the items discussed without breaching privileged information.

Annual Report

Key Finding 2 (Agreed)

The 2020 Annual Report of the States Employment Board [R.130/2021] was not provided to the States Assembly until the 3rd August 2021. The States Employment Board has therefore breached a statutory requirement under the terms of the Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005 which stipulates that the Annual Report should be provided by the States Employment Board to the Assembly within three months of the end of the calendar year.

Key Finding 3 (Not agreed)

The 2020 Annual Report for the States Employment Board lacks transparency as it does not:

• conform to an agreed framework to enable year-on-year analysis.

• measure against policy objectives; or

• contain clear statistical information.

Recommendation 2 (Accepted, and closed)

The State's Employment Board must confirm to the Assembly why it was unable to release its Annual Report for 2020 in the required timeframe and fulfil its statutory obligation as laid out in the Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005.

A late draft of the Annual Report was provided to the States Employment Board on 22nd March 2021. The Board wished to make a number of changes and revisions to the text provided and therefore drafting and approval went beyond the date required for a report to be presented to the States Assembly. The late drafting, and then subsequent sign off by the Board resulted in the late lodging of the Report.

There  is  currently  no  agreed  framework  or  prescription  for  the  activities  of  the  States Employment Board. The report has followed the same format for a number of years. The Comptroller and Auditor General has suggested a change in the approach to the Annual Report which is being addressed with a revised report format for the reporting year 2021.

The significant policy agenda of the Board has been ensuring parity of pay between pay groups. This has dominated the policy agenda for the Board in the first 3 years of its current term. The report presents how pay objectives have been met. This includes a settlement of all pay negotiations for 2021 without dispute, and significantly the agreement of a pay offer with civil service trades unions for the first time in many years. Additionally, pay related to nurses and midwives, which had fallen behind on parity with civil service grades has now been addressed and parity maintained in 2021.

Additionally, the report covers the new policy agenda aligned to the People Strategy, which will be reported on as a major theme for progress in 2021.

Recommendation 3 (Accepted, in part)

The States Employment Board report must adequately reflect its activities as laid out in the Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005. The report must conform to an agreed framework to deliver year-on-year analysis, provide measurements against policy objectives, and provide clear statistical information. The Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005 should be amended to ensure the Annual Report of the States Employment Board is released at the same time as the States Annual Report and Accounts.

The Board welcomes recommendations about improving reporting and transparency in the Annual Report.

In their evidence to the panel, the Board provided information in relation to the plan to improve source data, and therefore the accuracy of reporting. It was presented that trend data was unreliable due to the historical poorly maintained employee information. This is being rectified as part of a project in 2021, to be enhanced by the implementation of the Integrated Technology Solution in 2022.

The Board would be content to establish the principle of reporting at the same time as the Annual Report and Accounts, and aligning the Gender pay reporting to the same timeframe given much of the data is from the same source. The Board does not believe this requires a legislative change where the principle is accepted.

People Strategy

The  People  Strategy  was  created,  developed,  and  finalised  in  October  2020  following engagement  with  around  400  employees.  The  Board  approved  the  People  Strategy  and fundamental work under the strategy has been carried out by People and Corporate Services.

Key Finding 4 (Agreed)

The completion of the People Strategy, recommended in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, has highlighted a significant amount of fundamental work which will need to be overseen by the States Employment Board.

The Board welcomes the recognition from the Panel that endorses the Board's view that a significant amount of fundamental work is required. In the first 3-years of the operation of this Board, the priority has been on resolving long-standing and difficult pay policy decisions.

A fundamental aspect of the pay disputes has been the disparity in pay between different groups. With the pay awards in 2021, the Board has achieved its long-stated objective of ensuring equal pay for work of equal value. For example, over the past 10 years nurses pay had fallen behind that of the civil service group. The SEB's differentiated pay settlements of the past three years has now addressed this pay gap.

The  Board  has  restructured  its  work  programme  to  ensure  that  our  focus  turns  to  the implementation of the People Strategy as well as ensuring we meet our legal duties as the employer for the health and safety of employees.

Key areas of focus over the past year included:

Bullying and harassment: The Board were pleased to see progress being made since 2018. In their oral report to the Board, The HR Lounge were complimentary and reassuring that the leadership of the organisation and the policy frameworks were making an impact and progress has been made. We continue to focus on the culture of the organisation through the Team Jersey programme and the People Strategy.

Health and safety: A key component of our work has been the improvement and investment in health and safety at work. We now monitor on a monthly basis, a dashboard of compliance, key statistics and the improvement workplan from the Health and Safety Board. Pay Policy: Has addressed long-standing pay disparity between different pay groups, particularly between nurses and civil servants of similar grades. This was achieved in 2020 and maintained in 2021. Additionally, the historical pay dispute involving the Allied Health Professionals was resolved in early 2021.

Gender Pay Gap: The Board published the Island's first Gender Pay Gap Report in 2019 and continues to ensure that barriers to pay parity and reducing the gap continues. This includes supporting more women into senior positions, removing barriers to work, flexible working and overhauling our policies to remove barriers to progression and opportunities. Target Operating Models: Providing review and challenge to the target operating models and improving the methods for change as a result of the legislative changes to the organisation of States entities.

Be Heard Survey: Undertaking, communicating and acting on the most comprehensive employee survey for a number of years. The Board recognised there would be some difficult messages but has sought to be more transparent than previous years and has oversight of the action planning and delivery for improvements. Future years will use the same survey methodology and provider to allow for like-for-like comparisons and trend data.

In 2021, our focus has turned to the People Strategy including:

Total reward review: developing a longer-term strategy to create greater parity for employees for terms and conditions, addressing the gender pay gap, the sustainability of the pensions schemes, new reward and recognition programmes, performance management and rewards and career structure for pay.

Performance management: embedding the current My Conversation My Goals, performance conversations, and developing a longer-term approach to performance management utilising the new technology platforms being introduced in 2022.

Strategic workforce planning: A new toolkit and workforce planning method has been introduced and piloted and is now being rolled out across departments.

Policy Framework: embedding a new, simpler framework for policies, reducing the number of policies and procedures. A focus on early resolution of disputes. We recognise there has been a delay to the review of key policies and intend to complete the core policies and Codes of Practice by the end of 2021.

Diversity and inclusion:  We have commissioned external support to develop an evidence- based strategy for equality, diversity and inclusion. This includes supporting employee networks to develop and be involved in future policy developments.

Integrated technology solution: the delivery of the integrated platform that will allow greater functionality, reporting and ease of processes for managers and employees, replacing over 13 different systems and manual processes, creating a more efficient and effective provision of accurate and timely management information.

Case management: improving our response times and approach to cases, in particular whistleblowing and bullying. Creating a learning culture.

Talent development: creating opportunities for on-Island talent development from new entry careers, to experienced hires and career changes, along with succession planning and an investment in qualification on-Island.

Management development: a focus on getting the basics right at line management level, including the flagship programme World Class Manager, Espresso sessions and management qualifications.

We continue to ask officers to focus on getting the basics right' whilst we as a Board are focused on the more fundamental strategic issues, setting the longer-term objectives for sustained improvements.

Key Finding 5 (Not agreed)

The reluctance by the States Employment Board to release its 2020 Annual Report alongside the refusal to release its minutes and the lack of awareness from third parties, such as Trade Unions on matters such as the People Strategy, highlights that a culture of transparency has still to be fully developed.

The Board was not reluctant to release the Annual Report.

The issues related to the minutes of the Board have been addressed in the sections above.

The People Strategy was briefed to all Trade Unions in October 2020, alongside the briefing for the Be Heard survey headline results. The Trade Unions were also invited to attend the development sessions for the new people strategy. At these sessions we presented the policy framework, BeHeard results and other briefings, the people Strategy is referred to frequently as it is embedded in the operational work of People and Corporate Services.

Whilst the communications of the wider strategy and activities needs further development, as acknowledged in the Board's presentation to the Panel, this does not correlate to a lack of transparency.

Key Finding 6 (Agreed)

The People Strategy can be a public document for use in a consultation but has not been shared by the States Employment Board. Effective internal communication of strategy is recognised by the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development as important for developing trust within an organisation and has a consequential impact on employee engagement, organisational culture and productivity.

Recommendation 4 (Accepted)

A communication strategy and timeline for formal release of the People Strategy must be developed by the States Employment Board within the next three months. This must align to Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development principles to ensure an effective communication strategy is developed.

The People Strategy brand and communications plan is in development, as advised to the Panel in June 2021. The Government Communications standard OASIS' is the method being used for communications. This is to be released at the end of November 2021, alongside a delivery plan for 2022.

Recommendation 5 (Accepted, and closed)

The States Employment Board must actively engage with Unions in a structured and clear format. The States Employment Board must give direction regarding consultation with representatives of States' employees to ensure it fulfils its duties under the Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005.

The Board have in place a scheme of delegation to ensure these functions are met. A framework agreement has been in place and is currently undergoing further improvement. The framework covers the local meetings with trades unions, dispute mechanisms and escalation to the Board.

Fortnightly meetings with Trades Unions take place which allow for either the employer or trades unions to discuss in a timely manner matters arising.

Weekly meetings are diarised to introduce consultation documents to Trade Unions in advance of staff consultation. This provides an opportunity for the Trade Unions to understand the proposals, seek clarifications from management and support their members during change.

Along with officers from respective Departments, officers can respond in a timely manner to resolve issues before they escalate and agree organisational changes promptly. An example of this would be the Covid Schools working group that commenced in April 2020, where unions worked daily with Officers to produce guidance for school staff, to keep Jersey schools open.

The Chief Executive, as Head of Public Service has recently met with all Trades Unions by means of introduction, and individually with Trade Unions.

The Board direct and set the mandate for their lead negotiator to discuss and agree pay and terms and conditions of employment.

People Dashboard

Key Finding 7 (Agreed)

The people dashboard, to monitor human resource management, has been progressed by the States Employment Board following recommendations in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report, but it lacks relevant content such as historical data and has not been quality assured. Therefore, it is not possible to confidently track if areas are improving or requiring improvement.

Recommendation 6 (Accepted, in part)

The People Dashboard, to monitor human resource management, must include historical data and provide a brief commentary to ensure the States Employment Board has a high-level overview on changing issues and trends to inform strategy by the end of 2021.

We agree with the observations of the Panel, and their endorsement of the actions we are taking to improve insight and reporting. However, deadline suggested of the end of 2021 is arbitrary and not achievable. Data reporting relies on a maturing approach to data, reporting and analytical capabilities, and the availability of accurate past data, which is not currently the case.

The focus at present is upon getting the basics of people analytics and reporting in place, including better quality data. It is to be noted that some of our people data structures are byzantine and standard reporting functionality from legacy systems is unsatisfactory. This will be addressed with the implementation of the Integrated Technology Solution programme and improved maintenance of data and both standard and non-standard reporting being more powerful and simpler to produce.

Notwithstanding this, a dashboard has been developed throughout 2021 that reflects our key people data at a point in time. The current dashboard is available to the Board, Directors General and HR Business Partners and includes data about headcount, employee turnover, sickness absence, payroll costs, zero hours contract deployment, agency staff use and costs, employee relations case management, My Welcome (induction) participation, My Conversation My Goals (performance appraisal) participation, Disclosure & Barring Service checks compliance, as well as two Health & Safety areas; compliance with best practice health & safety standards and information  about  accidents  and  incidents.  Some  month-by-month  data  is  presented  for example, headcount, employee turnover, sickness absence, payroll costs, zero hours contracts deployment, case management, My Welcome (induction) and Disclosure & Barring Service checks.

The quality of data about posts (establishment) and sickness absence has been recognised as an issue, as has the quality of some employee records. A significant review and update of all employee records and post related data is nearing completion, with all departments, (excluding Health and Community Services), due to be completed by 15th November. Health & Community Service will be completed before the end of 2021. Once the establishment data cleanse project is completed, employee and job / post data will be more reliable and suitable for publication.

A similar piece of work is ongoing to collate and input into PeopleLink, all historical sickness absence data available. This includes supporting line managers via Espresso manager training sessions and video guides on how to update sickness absence records promptly. This work is crucial and supported by a further emphasis to managers about their responsibilities to maintain sickness records quickly when a member of their team falls ill.

The use and confidence of using people data has been growing during 2021. For example:

• Within Health & Community Services the data from the dashboard is discussed at the monthly People and Organisational Development Committee, with the Health & Community Services executive and used to inform the Care Group performance reviews on key workforce metrics. For the first time there is departmental and Care Group level workforce data to inform workforce planning and retention strategies.

• Other departmental Senior Leadership Teams and trade unions are regularly briefed on people trends using the people dashboard.

• The People & Corporate Services workforce planning team have created data catalogues for departments to assist them in moving through the workforce planning process. These catalogues allow the Senior Leadership Teams to complete an analysis of their workforce, which will support the development of crucial workforce and succession plans across the organisation.

• The people dashboard was presented to Executive Leadership Team in January 2021 and an updated dashboard was presented to Operating Committee in July 2021. A further update will be provided to Operating Committee in October 2021.

In addition, a more comprehensive dashboard has been developed to understand in more detail about employee relations cases. For example, identifying cases by theme, by department and recently identifying cases that are taking longer to be resolved. This has enabled us to focus upon specific themes, for example to review bullying and harassment cases, identify potential issues, take action to understand more about the root cause and agree mitigating actions.

There has been progress putting the basics in place, in developing and using people data and the people dashboard during 2021 and we are confident that this progress will be maintained during 2022. Our vision is that the people dashboard moves from being a descriptive presentation of data at a point in time, to being a predictive tool, looking at historical workforce data, external market trends and is able to predict future workforce trends and needs. Achieving our vision will take at least 18 months – 2 years and is dependent upon achieving and maintaining high quality data and the successful implementation of Integrated Technology Solution people data reporting functionality.

Independent Advisers (to the Board)

Key Finding 8 (Not agreed)

The States Employment Board is allowed two Independent Advisors to inform its work as per the Employment  of  States  of  Jersey  Employees  (Jersey)  Law  2005.  At  the  present  time  the  States Employment Board has decided to only engage one independent Advisor, who has been in post for 10 years, to inform its work which has restricted its ability to focus on the detail of the data, proposed policies and codes of practice to ensure proper engagement with the process and the executive.

Recommendation 7 (Rejected)

The States Employment Board must immediately focus on enhancing its skills and resources and ensure insight, knowledge and expertise goes beyond a political cycle. The States Employment Board should engage a second independent Advisor and consider the terms of its current Advisor and how other stakeholders, who are not States Members, could bring their specialist skills to strengthen the outcomes of the Board

The Board have already completed a review of the role of the independent adviser. A role profile has been completed, which sets out the range of skills the Board have considered necessary.

The finding (8) is incorrect. The Law allows for up to two independent advisers. There is no evidence presented, or requested, that suggests the current adviser restricts or inhibits the Board in the discharge of their duties. The role of the adviser is not to engage with the Executive but to advise the Board.

The Board agrees that a second advisor may we be advisable however, the Board has taken the view that given there is less than 8 months until the next Board's term of office, then it should be for the next Board to determine how they wish to be advised.

Policies and Procedures

Key Finding 9 (Agreed)

The States Employment Board has not agreed or published a structured timetable for the review and implementation of the revised Codes of Practice. This has significantly reduced the Board's ability to measure progress and hold Government officers to account as per its legal requirement.

Key Finding 10 (Not agreed)

The States Employment Board does not appear to have a coherent strategy, structure or focus on good performance to reduce the likelihood of Policy being required.

Recommendation 8 (Accepted and closed)

The States Employment Board must publish, before the end of 2021, a structured timetable for the review and implementation of the revised Codes of Practice, policies and procedures.

Recommendation 9 (Rejected)

The States Employment Board must publish a policy agenda which focuses on good performance and ensure managers and employees understand the behaviours expected before the end of 2021.

The finding (10) creates a causal effect between having good performance and the need for a reduced number of policies. The Board disagrees on two counts:

1. Our approach to the People Strategy sets out four key areas to address that have been evidenced as needing improvement. This is our structured and focussed approach. This includes, as set out above, a systemic approach to improving performance, productivity and engagement. They are not mutually exclusive events.
2. Certain policies will always be required, although our emphasis is on reducing the number of policies, the complexity of our policy framework and enhance the focus on early resolution.  For example,  it  is  our  intention to  remove  the  Bullying  and Harassment Policy. It does not mean that incidents of bullying and harassment won't be addressed, but will fall within a procedure for Dignity at Work, covering bullying, harassment, grievance, discrimination etc. However, at present, we have a conscious focus on bullying and harassment and how we will treat, specifically, this issue.

Recommendation 8 agrees with the Board that a comprehensive review and systemic approach to replacing the current, dated policy approach is needed. The Board agreed the framework and approach in February 2021.

This  Policy  Framework  will  refresh  all  policies.  This  included  design  principles  and recommendations from the Comptroller and Auditor General report titled Role and operation of the States Employment Board'. The Policy Framework has been developed to demonstrate the connectivity between the products related to policy. The following diagram was prepared to provide a visual of that connectivity.

People and Corporate Services have prepared a schedule of works for a refresh of all policies, setting out the prioritisation for the Codes of Practice and policy delivery. This has been available since February 2021 and sets out the products to be delivered throughout 2021 and into 2022. The volume of work has created a capacity issue within the team which is currently being addressed and the revised timetable for delivery will be in place in November 2021.

The priority for the remainder of 2021 is the completion of the Codes of Practice and the big 5' policies  addressing  bullying  and  harassment,  grievance,  disciplinary,  code  of  conduct (standards in public service), whistleblowing.

The complexity of the public service may not be fully understood by the Panel or their adviser. A single policy cannot easily' be written and adopted. There are 22 different pay groups, some of whom are subject to different regulation and laws. For example, the induction policy is standard for the majority of the workforce, but professional standards and technical competency regulations within services such as the police, fire service, paramedics etc require alternative policies. Alongside this, to embed policies requires training, toolkits, system/process changes and configurations and a communications plan. Given the fundamental overhaul of policies and procedures required by the Board, this is anticipated to be a 2-year programme.

Policy Development

Key Finding 11 (Agreed)

Training on discrimination including bullying and harassment is optional for managers and employees. This creates risks to the public service and appears to conflict with the behaviours and culture which the Government of Jersey is seeking to deliver for its managers and employees.

Recommendation 10 (Rejected)

Training on discrimination including bullying and harassment should be made mandatory immediately, to build and create a culture where wrong behaviour is quickly called out by colleagues and enable opportunities for changes in behaviour.

The Board accepts that bullying and harassment, along with other behaviours is a risk (finding 11) and is recognised as such on the strategic risk register. However, the suggested approach to addressing this does not consider the systemic requirements of addressing poor behaviour in the workplace. A mandatory, one-size-fits-all training programme is poor practice, expensive and will have little impact.

Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination is a complex area that requires holistic and whole systems thinking that includes a range of different interventions and thinking to shift mind-sets, behaviours, ways of working and understanding if it is to be tackled effectively.

The Board has demonstrated that it is committed to addressing these challenges. We welcome the oversight of Scrutiny. However, we recommend a proportionate, wide-ranging approach to training and cultural interventions. Mandated training is not an effective way of addressing this issue, instead we are taking a systemic view from assessing attitudes and behaviours at interview, embedding awareness and standards during the induction period, addressing through the performance management system and regular communications and conversations about respect and behaviours within the workplace.

Our approach is to address behaviours (not just bullying and harassment) at each stage of the employee lifecycle (attraction, job interviews, induction, personal development plans, appraisal, training  offers,  employee  networks,  internal  communications,  employee  surveys,  exit interviews).

Additionally, we are targeting key areas with our resources where concerns are raised, which we believe is a better use of funds than a thin-blanket approach to generic training.

In response to the first HR Lounge Report (2018), a thorough review of both the existing Bullying and Harassment policies and Whistleblowing policies was undertaken. This resulted in both policies being entirely rewritten and 24 of the 29 recommendations that HR Lounge made being implemented. These included the introduction of an independent Speak Up Line' and training by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service for a large number of mediators and investigators. Many implementation measures were put in place to support the roll out of these two policies, which were introduced in January 2019.

These measures included mandatory face to face briefing sessions for over 900-line managers. These were held over a number of months, across various venues. 17 face to face briefing sessions were held in total and were delivered in person by the Head of HR Policies, with each session being opened and sponsored by a Director General. Each line manager took away an action point to highlight and discuss the two new policies at their next team meeting and resources were provided to help them do this. The sessions were well attended and well received.

By becoming a values-led organisation, with effective performance management in place and a cadre of capable, competent and confident managers we will have much better success in tackling any areas of Bullying, Harassment and Discrimination. There are a number of programmes of work in place to help enable this, including the My Conversations, My Goals performance management approach; Team Jersey and the new Learning and Skills offers for Managers and aspiring Managers. The Team Jersey programme focuses on creating a positive workplace culture and central to all of the programme delivery that all managers are expected to attend is a clear focus on our values and behavioural expectations. In addition, there are new training modules through Team Jersey on Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging as well as an Espresso session available on the Diversity and Inclusion basics. Reviews of learning needs identified through My Conversation, My Goal discussions are being conducted during autumn 2021 to identify any additional trends and needs.

Performance Management

Key Finding 12 (Agreed)

The Unions have raised concerns regarding inconsistent policy implementation which could compromise the organisation's stated values and needs to be resolved.

Recommendation 11 (Rejected)

Ah-hoc reviews of policy implementation should be immediately completed by the States Employment Board on a quarterly basis to reduce inconsistencies.

Recommendation 12 (Accepted)

The States Employment Board must ensure a code of conduct is adopted by the senior leadership team prior to the end of 2021.

The Panel recognised the Boards' desire to simplify the current policy landscape. We welcome the Panel's recognition that our focus on removing inconsistencies within policies is the right one, and that this will assist us in addressing inconsistencies across the workforce.

In doing so, we have centralised and strengthened the People Services Consultancy team (formerly the case management team) to provide more consistent advice and support to managers. They are working with colleagues to simplify the policies and ensure a greater level of consistency is applied.

We do not agree that ad-hoc policy implementation reviews are a good use of resources. The issues that are already known need capacity and time to address. We are then putting in place continuous review and learning from cases. This systemic approach is preferable to ad hoc reviews that may result in the risk that ad hoc changes to one policy creates dis-alignment with other policies leaving us back in the same position of incompatibility and inconsistency between policies.

The Board is publishing in October 2021, the final Code of Practice: Standards in Public Service which applies to all employees, including the senior leadership team. This replaces the dated Code of Conduct.

Bullying and Harassment Policy

Key Finding 13 (Agreed)

The initial HR Lounge report presented in February 2018 has been taken seriously by the States Employment Board and most actions have been implemented. However, there are some actions which remain outstanding, and some are not yet at a satisfactory level. This has resulted in significant stress to some employees.

Key Finding 14 (Agree)

The HR Lounge update report (February 2021) was informed that a new Grievance Procedure would be launched in early 2021. At the time of writing this report this has yet to be implemented.

Key Finding 15 (Agree, in part)

No evidence has been received from the States Employment Board to confirm the timetable or completion of the recommendations contained within the second HR Lounge reports which will have a significant impact on the confidence in the culture of the organisation.

The Board welcomes the recognition of the Panel that it has taken seriously the HR Lounge report and recommendations. We were encouraged by the HR Lounge in their most recent report that we continue to improve under difficult circumstances.

However, it is difficult from the evidence presented by the Panel to correlate their finding that significant stress' to some employees was caused by some actions not being completed. We do recognise that those who make allegations, and those who are alleged to have committed misconduct, do find this period difficult.

Since  the  initial  HR  Lounge  report  of  2018,  and  the  implementation  of  24  of  the recommendations, plus the implementation of some of the HR Lounge report recommendations from 2021 we have continued to improve and develop. One significant, long reaching and positive change that we are currently trialling is that of restorative practice, as presented to the Panel in our oral evidence.

The outstanding recommendations from the 2018 HR Lounge report have now been superseded and considered closed.

We are making good progress in addressing the recommendations of the 2021 HR Lounge Review, including expanding the team of investigators and shortening the length of time to investigate.

It is anticipated that the process of trialling a restorative practice approach will further support the recommendations and actions required. It is fully appreciated that when concerns are raised, they can affect relationships within teams and the wider services and this can lead to negative results when dealing with concerns and the impact this has on our colleagues, including their psychological wellbeing.

By introducing a restorative approach, we will take preventative action to identify processes that exacerbate the potential for error. We recognise that some of our people processes may have caused  unintentional  hurt.  This  restorative  practice  approach  will  align  with  the recommendations made by the HR Lounge.

Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service guidance and training for conducting workplace investigations has been introduced and we fully appreciate that investigations are important to resolving workplace concerns efficiently and fairly. As a result of the recommendations from the HR Lounge 20 employees were trained by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service to carry out workplace investigations and a further 21 employees were trained by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service to carry out workplace mediation. By introducing the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service guidance for workplace investigations, we are ensuring that we are complying with Jersey Employment Law. Complementing our 20 Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service-trained internal investigators, we have recruited 15 investigators on Island and have contracted a further 3 from off Island, this is to ensure that investigations are fair, objective and progressed efficiently. We endeavour to complete investigations within a four-week period, this is not always achievable due to employee's availability including shift work. We always request that employees make all attempts to attend investigation meetings to ensure the investigation process is not delayed and reduce any negative impact on all parties involved in the matter.

A grievance policy has been developed, following the design principles set out in the Policy Framework document presented to the Board in February 2021. It is anticipated that Grievance will be ready to roll out during the last quarter of 2021, along with disciplinary, capability and managing attendance. This has taken longer to develop as the policy team became dedicated to continuous changes to covid-safe policies within the workplace during 2020 and early 2021.

Recommendation 13 (Rejected)

The States Employment Board should ensure that the following steps in relation to policy and procedure implementation takes place in order that it fulfils its duties to a suitable standard as defined in the Employment of the States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005:

• All draft policies should undergo a full technical review, by an experienced professional engaged by the States Employment Board, who has not been involved in the process up to that date, to bring a fresh mind to the policy, who is able to stress check and challenge a policy against the core values of the organisation, industry practice and appropriate legislation, and ensure it is consistent.

• A second element of the Technical Review should in conjunction with other policies associated with policy being reviewed, and as part of the quality assurance process, seek to ensure that policies are consistent with each other and where an issue has to move between policies, for example from Bullying and Harassment to Disciplinary, that it is clear where the links are, that they will work and there is no duplication of process.

• A timeline must be agreed by the States Employment Board to confirm delivery expectations for all aspects of the policy framework.

• The States Employment Board should consider changes to policy and procedures to reduce their use.

The Board do not accept that additional overhead and administration is required in policy development. The Board have agreed a fundamental overhaul of the policy framework and our approach to policy development that is leading practice.

The policies are already embedding the values of the organisation as well as embedding the People Strategy commitments.

The independent adviser to the Board already provides an experienced professional resource to advise the Board on policies.

Recommendation 14 (Accepted, and completed)

The States Employment Board must immediately review investigation timescales to identify ways to significantly reduce the time taken to complete an investigation. This should include researching how the administration can be streamlined, or support given to managers to undertake and the time periods allowed for investigation. The States Employment Board must consider dedicated investigators for the investigation process, and / or outsourcing some of the investigations, to enable timely resolution of issues.

A review of existing cases was undertaken over the summer period. This has resulted in many cases being closed and/or resolved.

Key actions were identified as having been taken, including:

• Introducing Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service-standard guidelines and training for approaches to investigations to improve consistency

• Engaging more external investigators (15 from Jersey, 3 from UK) to provide capacity, expertise and independence for more complex investigations.

• Professional development programme for the expanded People Services Consultancy team (case management)

• Introduction of pilot for a 5-day fact find, before entering into any formal process, reducing the need for full investigations, and reducing the period of anxiety for employees under investigation

• Introducing the pilot for restorative practice – seeking early resolution between parties which is more conducive than formal investigations.

• Centralised oversight and supervision of all bullying and harassment, and whistleblowing allegations to ensure independence from the department where the allegations are made

We endeavour to complete investigations within a four-week period, this is not always achievable due to employee's availability including shift work. We request that employees make all attempts to attend investigation meetings to ensure the investigation process is not delayed and reduce any negative impact on all parties involved in the matter.

We have recognised that entering into formal processes can cause distress to those involved, create uncertainty and de-stabilise the wider team, take up significant management and investigation time and may result in a more fractured relationship at work. We have fundamentally changed our approach to seek to resolve, de-escalate and quickly establish key facts.

Since 2016, the introduction of Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service-standards and continuous improvement has seen a 25% reduction in cases being formally investigated.

Restorative practice was discussed with the Panel and a pilot scheme has been started in Health & Community Services. As part of our people strategy delivery plan, it is proposed to implement restorative practice across States entities from early 2022, learning lessons from the Health & Community Services pilot.

Research suggests that developing a values-based culture, where most issues between colleagues are addressed informally, seeking to understand objectively what happened and pragmatically agreeing mitigating actions, reduces the use of formal employee relations cases. Such approaches reduce the level of stress experienced, enable working relationships to be maintained or repaired relatively quickly and significantly reduces the level of resources, including people, required to support formal casework.

Whistleblowing Policy

Key Finding 16 (Agreed)

The Relaunched Whistle Blowing Policy contains typographical errors and has only been partially updated with variations in terminology being a prevailing issue throughout the document. The Flowchart does not highlight the ability of employees to refer to the confidential helpline and no confirmation on rates of use have been provided in a report format to the Panel to show the impact of the external line.

Key Finding 17 (Not agreed)

The  Whistleblowing  policy  relies  heavily  online  managers  to  complete  functions which  in other organisations would be completed by either independent managers or trained specialists and does not take into account those scenarios where the management lines are the issue. Evidence provided to the Panel has confirmed this is a significant issue which needs to be addressed.

Recommendation 15 (Accepted)

Before the end of the year, the States Employment Board should consider further the pathway for the reporting of whistleblowing allegations to include the ability to report directly to HR professionals rather than just line managers or an external helpline. The States Employment Board should also clarify the point at which allegations are reporting to it, in what format and its promotion strategy of the policy to the workforce to build trust and confidence.  

A refresh of the Whistleblowing policy, alongside an identifiable communications campaign will be undertaken by the end of 2021.  

Exit Interview Procedures

Key Finding 18 (Not agreed)

Policy has not been determined by the States Employment Board for the exit interview process. This lack of clarity is not enabling the States Employment Board to build suitable data and analyse the results.

Recommendation 16 (Rejected)

Before the end of Quarter 4 2021, the States Employment Board should produce a short policy paper confirming its objectives for the exit interview process to fulfil its requirements to a suitable standard under the Employment of States of Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law 2005.

Since November 2019, the Board has had in place a procedure for exit interviews. This replaced the former procedure that was not being uniformly applied and relied solely on the line manager.

The centralised procedure was digitised in November 2019, with further improvements made in 2020 where digital methods were not reaching those leaving the organisation. A reporting dashboard was introduced in 2021 to help inform policy and insight into the key issues for leavers.

More recently, the Business Improvement Team has started to review key processes for leavers to further improve our ability to capture leaver reasons.

Of the 299 forms received in 2021, nearly a third cited career development opportunities as the reason for leaving, followed by a change in career' as the second option. This validates the Board focus on internal talent, career development and widening professional development opportunities.   The  People  Strategy  has,  as  one  of  the  four  commitments  employee development.

Of those leaving, 65.5% said they were proud to work for the States, with only 14% saying they were not proud. 45.2% would recommend the States as a place to work, against 24% who wouldn't. These figures continue to inform our strategy and policies. The Board is looking at ways to improve the uptake of exit interviews.

Disciplinary Policy

Key Finding 19 (Agreed)

The current disciplinary policy requires additional significant review. There are currently several separate documents, making the process complex and confusing.

The current disciplinary policies are already in an advanced stage of redrafting, and new toolkits and training are being developed. This will be completed by December 2021.

Target Operating Model

Key Finding 20 (Agreed)

Consultation with employees on the One Gov Target Operating Model took place, however the lack of justification for the restructure led to a disconnect with employees and there are those in the organisation and wider stakeholders who feel they have been unable to have their say on changes. Involving employees earlier and building a case for change in conjunction with those impacted could have helped alleviate this issue.

The BeHeard employee survey identified a disconnect between the understanding of the OneGov initiative and the organisational changes being made. In particularly, the departments at the start of organisational changes were more heavily impacted by the change than those later on.

We changed our approach to organisational change to find more efficient and effective ways for managing change and reducing the uncertainty for employees. This included measuring employee views at the start, throughout and at the end of the change process.

We introduced:

• Pre-consultation engagement – allowing employees to ask questions, feed in ideas and identify how they can be best supported and involved in the change.

• Job matching – replacing the former job scoring' process that significantly speeded up informing colleagues what potential roles they may have.

• Two-stage consultation – where we identified that part of the organisational change policy would not apply, we consulted with colleague and trade unions on modifying the process to make it more suited to the change being proposed.

• Post-implementation planning – identifying where, after the changes are made, work is required to embed the desired changes.

Key Finding 21 (Agreed)

The programme of work for the Target Operating Model should be governed by project management principles. The failure to do so has led to systemic inconsistencies, delays, suspicion and an undermining of the entire process.

Recommendation 17 (Accepted)

There should be a review or report commissioned, and made publicly available, reflecting on the restructuring of the public service to date which includes advice received from third parties to channel the future mandate and the timing of decision making. This should take place by the next Government term.

The Board agrees that following any significant organisational change, a review should be undertaken to improve organisational change in the future.

Key Finding 22 (Agreed)

The One Gov Target Operating Model has introduced wide ranging restructuring which has required recruitment across the organisation whilst professional training programmes are implemented. The model will continue to be updated as new technologies and systems are introduced.

Key Finding 23 (Agree, in part)

Contradictory timelines mean that decisions have been made before consultation, this has taken place throughout the implementation of the Target Operating Model and risks being continued in any future iterations.

Significant organisational change requires planning and good governance. The next iteration of the operating model for the Public Service must be more clearly defined up-front, adequately resourced for programme management and change management and monitor the effectiveness of the changes. This finding will be shared with DG's for their feedback and suggested improvements.

Job Descriptions

Key Finding 24 (Agreed)

The Panel has received mixed reports on the consultation of staff during the development of job descriptions, including those updated as part of the Target Operating Model process, this may suggest a mixed approach across departments and managers.

Key Finding 25 (Agreed)

It has been suggested to the Panel that almost identical roles will differ in grade depending on the proposer of a job description.

Key Finding 26 (Agreed)

There are examples of good practice in the creation and grading of job descriptions, although these are not always learned from.

Recommendation 18 (Accepted)

Examples of good development of job descriptions within the Government of Jersey should be made available by the States Employment Board as soon as possible, in order to allow for best practice to be learnt throughout the organisation.

Colleagues  have  the  opportunity  both  directly  with  their  manager  and  via  trades  union representatives to comment and challenge job descriptions in the Target Operating Model. Training for job description writing and documentation to provide guidance was provided at the beginning of Target Operating Model process,

It is acknowledged that some people are better at writing job descriptions than others, but there are checks in place to mitigate this. The job description process carried out by the Job Evaluation Team  involves quality checks before sending job descriptions for  evaluation, and further information/clarification  is  requested  where  necessary  (i.e.,  missing  information, qualifications/experience mismatch with role accountabilities and deliverables).

The Target Operating Model evaluations are carried out by external consultants Korn Ferry. The consultant looks at the job description in its entirety and the full structure of the job team (reporting lines etc) and so identifies where roles have been over emphasised and identifies duplication of management responsibilities within the team structure, or when he is concerned that the role does not fully match the deliverables of the job, and these are challenged. In these cases, discussions are held with Line Managers/Human Resources to understand and confirm job requirements, team structure etc, so that evaluation can be finalised.

As part of the Total Reward Review, the Board are looking to adopt the method of job families' and role profile matching instead of the full evaluation for each role profile. Role profiles will be matched against the most appropriate level within a job family – creating greater consistency, reducing inequality based on the quality of the role profile, and reduce overheads. This will be introduced over the next 2-years, as there are over 70 different professional groups and 22 pay groups that will need to be designed and assimilated into such an approach.

HR Function, Accountability and Practice

Key Finding 27 (Agreed)

The One Gov Target Operating Model has sought to centralise functions such as Human Resources.

Key Finding 28 (Agreed)

The implementation and introduction of the Target Operating Model is still underway in some departments and it may be many years before full benefit is realised.

Key Finding 29 (Not agreed)

Although much of the overall H.R. function has been centralised it appears that responsibility of running day to day elements of H.R. procedures has been significantly placed upon line managers.

The centralisation from departmental human resources teams to a group structure under the People and Corporate Services provides the opportunity for:

• Greater oversight and consistency of workforce management

• Improved capacity for key functions, critical to managing the workforce

• Greater consistency in the development and application of pay, terms and conditions and policies

• Reducing inequality across the organisation

• Professionalising functions such as learning and development, employee engagement, change management, case management etc.

• Greater coordination  and  more  effective  use  of  resources  for  development,  talent programmes, recruitment campaigns and change management.

As part of Corporate Strategic Priority 5 (Modernising Government) within the Government Plan, resources were allocated to replacing the out-dated management systems that contribute to a significant overhead for managers. The adoption of the Integrated Technology Solution will create  a  more  streamlined,  intuitive  approach  for  managers  to  focus  on  supporting  and developing their teams.

At  present,  we  recognise  that  managers  work  with  inadequate  technology,  bureaucratic processes and with a lack of key information. Our investment in the Integrated Technology Solution will go some way to address this.

Through the World Class Manager programme and the Espresso sessions, we are investing in mangers to understand how to undertake their roles more effectively.

Key Finding 30 (Agreed)

Accountability for Human Resources ultimately lies with the States Employment Board and Assistant Chief Minister, however responsibility for its implementation is held by all levels of the organisation, including Ministers, Director Generals and Managers.

Recommendation 19 (Accepted)

Further support and training must be given immediate priority by the States Employment Board to enable line mangers to fulfil their Human Resource responsibilities, furthermore People and Corporate Services must be clear which elements of Human Resource function it oversees or actively participates in

In 2019, Team Jersey introduced programmes for line managers. This has been developed further in 2021 through People & Corporate Services with a new line management offer for the World Class Manager programme and Espresso sessions. Of those attending the Espresso sessions, 95% of managers have positively evaluated the approach on content.

We intend to provide further support to managers as follows: -

In 2022, we intend to establish the Management Academy, with a comprehensive offer of training  and  development,  management  standards  (deriving  from  the  Code  of  Practice: Performance  and  Accountability)  and  investment  in  professional,  accredited  management qualifications. We will also introduce an aspiring manager' programme to prepare people who wish to become managers, as part of our talent programme for internal career development. The graphic below shows the progression route from the basic management (Capable Manager) through to the confident and inspiring management levels.

OneGov Impact and Practice

Key Finding 31 (Agreed)

Workforce morale has been negatively impacted in some departments by the implementation of the One Gov initiatives.

Key Finding 32 (Agreed, in part)

The benefits of the One Gov initiatives have yet to be realised and it is anticipated that it will be some time before these benefits are seen by all government employees and the general public.

Recommendation 20 (Accepted)

Benefit of the One Gov initiatives must be quantified in time for the next Chief Minister to decide which direction the programme should continue to take, and enable the incoming Chief Executive Officer to successfully deliver upon that political decision.

The Board accept that there has been a significant amount of change resulting from OneGov initiatives, and that these changes will continue for a number of years. Whilst the Target Operating Model will be completed in 2021, the move to modernising the estate and technology platforms will not be complete until 2024. However, these will ensure we have:

• A modern estate, fit for purpose such as a single organisational HQ, allowing greater collaboration and reducing operational overheads

• A new hospital that provides better facilities for patients and colleagues to work in better clinical environments and with greater access to on-Island education and improved training facilities.

• Technology platforms that reduces overheads, time and increases insight

• Reduced  risk  profile  across  States  entities  such  as  for  cyber  security,  reduced maintenance and health and safety risks, reduced clinical risks

• Better career structures, less inequality and fairer pay.

The target operating model for OneGov has allowed a more effective and joined up approach to managing the pandemic. The central coordination of departments, business continuity, public health policy and support to critical areas such as health services and education provide the ability to stand-up a response team and coordinate more effectively our response to this prolonged critical incident.

We acknowledge that change can be challenging as people adjust and it's a well-known fact that organisations will see morale drop when implementing change. However, despite this fact and the impact of a global pandemic, we saw employee engagement levels increase in our 2020 BeHeard survey.

All programmes of change activity are subject to governance reporting that require regular review of progress, risks and impact. Benefits are also tracked although for some programmes these maybe more long-term and depending on the stage of implementation this level of detail may not yet be available. As part of the newly appointed Chief Executive's induction she will be provided with a comprehensive overview of all corporate and significant department change activity.

Workplace Culture Leadership

Key Finding 33 (Not agreed)

There has been a concentration of power in the position of Chief Executive which could result in a risk to the organisation from a corporate governance and cultural perspective which must be independently reviewed.

Recommendation 21 (Rejected)

The appointment of the new Chief Executive should be delayed until after the States Employment Board report recognising lessons learned has been prepared, the law changes are defined in the Employment of  States of  Jersey Employees (Jersey) Law and the 2022 elections have taken place to ensure transparency on Ministerial aims and objectives.

Following the States debate on 15th September 2021, the legal implications of not proceeding with the appointment of the new Chief Executive Officer were outlined to the States Assembly, therefore, P.73 the proposition to delay the recruitment of the new Chief Executive Officer was withdrawn, and the appointment of the new Chief Executive Officer was announced.

The Board were unable to see how the Key Finding (33) was reached as no evidence was presented to draw this conclusion. The powers of the Chief Executive are set out in legislation.  Alongside this, the powers and authority of the Chief Executive include checks and balances, including their accountability as Accountable Officer, scrutiny by the Public Accounts Committee and Scrutiny Panels. The role is line managed by the Chief Minister and States Employment Board and an appraisal. The States' corporate governance framework is based on international standards and best practice.

Use of Consultants

Key Finding 34 (Agreed)

There has not been enough focus on utilising Jersey-based skills, both from a consultancy and employee perspective.

Key Finding 35 (Not agreed)

There is a lack of transparency around the appointment of consultants, including those utilised for Chief Executive appraisal reporting, which has created a culture of distrust in the Government of Jersey and alienated employees

The Board agree that due to historical lack of investment in the workforce, key skills and expertise has not been developed on-Island, and that we did not have in place opportunities for acting-up, secondments or career paths. This is being addressed.

We don't believe that there is a lack of transparency about the use of consultants. The P59/2019 report is published every six months, with the reasons and justification for the use of contingent workers. There is no evidence provided by the panel that justifies the assertion of a culture of distrust, related to the use of consultants.

There are detailed governance procedures in place where a temporary resource is required. It should however be noted that the organisation defines consultants into three categories:

1. Interims. This is where a skilled resource is required to temporarily cover a substantiated role within a department whilst a formal open recruitment exercise is undertaken.
2. Contractors. This is where a skilled resource is required for a specific project or programme where the specific and technical skills are not available within the existing employee base. These contractors will be engaged for all or a specific part of a programme.
3. Consultants. This resource which is procured through a formal procurement process are engaged to provide consultancy advice and services to States entities and are either specialist consultants in their field or part of a wider procured contract for example Integrated Technology Solution, Our Hospital or One HQ.

With categories 1 and 2, all requests have to follow a detailed financial and departmental approval before finally being approved by the Board. The Board have sight of the requirement, the outcomes of assignment and the financial expenditure. Any extensions to existing contracts - which are only approved for an initial period of six months - (unless there are exceptional circumstances) have to be presented and re-approved by the Board.

Additionally, the Jersey Appointments Commission has a monthly overview of categories 1 and 2 to ensure that a formal process has been followed in the initial recruitment of the Interim/Contractor and in the case of Interim workers that a formal recruitment process is either underway or being planned. This covered the most senior interim resources recruited under the previous Chief Executive Officer's tenure.

In the first 6 months of 2021 where the use of Interim and Contractors has averaged between 30 to 35 per month, around a quarter of this cohort are Jersey based residents supplying specialist skills into the organisation for which they would be paying the relevant tax and social security payments.

The organisation's mid-term view is to reduce the reliance on specialist resources which is currently being explored with the implementation of Workforce Planning. This will assess the current skills base of Civil Servants and identify the delta areas where additional expertise and skills are required in the next 1 to 5 years to meet departmental deliverables and the wider Government Plan. This skills review has already been implemented across Health & Community Services for nursing and Children, Young People, Education & Skills for children's social workers, where degree and entry level programmes are available to Islanders at Highlands College and directly into public service. Additionally, a large programme is also underway to recruit entry and mid-level engineers and planners into Infrastructure, Housing & Environment and also Project Managers across the whole of the organisation.

Most recently the organisation has concluded a number of Internal acting up processes which has promoted 5 existing officers into Tier 2 acting up roles. We are currently advertising internal acting opportunities to two Director General positions. Additionally, one appointment into a Tier 2 role was conducted solely on Island and a second role is planned for on Island only recruitment in the 4th quarter of 2021. This forms the outline of our succession planning strategy (which is currently in development), where there is a commitment to recruit and develop skills on-Island.

Be Heard Survey

Key Finding 36 (Not agreed)

Dissemination of the results of the Be Heard survey has been mixed, and at times has excluded specific relevant information on a number of questions asked in the survey.

Key Finding 37 (Agreed)

Results of the Be Heard survey suggest that although employees are proud of the work of the Government of Jersey, there are somewhat mixed feelings towards senior leadership and the One Gov change programme. There are those whose wellbeing is suffering, and many do not believe their remuneration package is fair. The differences in opinion and experience vary in different areas of the organisation.

Key Finding 38 (Agreed)

Staff morale and wellbeing varies significantly across different areas of the organisation and is worrying low in some parts particularly in Health.

Recommendation 22 (Accepted, and completed)

As a matter of urgency the full data and results of the Be Heard survey should be publicly released and workshops  should  continue  with  all  relevant  stakeholders,  including  staff  and  unions,  to  help communicate these as well as ascertain reasoning for low scores in some areas.

The Board agrees with the Panel about the interpretation of the results. We welcomed the views of employees and we are taking the results of the survey seriously. The results endorse the Board's view that we have some way to go to creating a more positive culture, consistently across States entities. The survey also endorses our approach and focus for the People Strategy.

The BeHeard survey is the most comprehensive survey undertaken by the Board and provides significant insight and evidence for action. At the same time, the results interpretation requires expertise as value-judgements cannot be substituted for evidence-based decisions (such as an incorrect correlation and interpretation from the panel in Key Finding 39).

The BeHeard survey results have been released and cascaded through all departments. This was a staged release to accommodate business pressures in departments, such as managing Covid demand and the cycle of the academic year.

Trade unions and States Members were also briefed in advance of the cascades taking place.

Workshops have been held, and continue to be held, to both engage employees and share the results  as  well  as  encouraging  collaboration  and  ownership  in  developing  action  plans. Departments have identified their top three respective priority areas to address and have developed action plans as part of the work they are doing to create People and Culture Plans. This will require continued commitment and effort in departments and reporting of progress being made happens quarterly to the Executive Leadership Team.

Please note that Key Finding 36 is not correct. As presented in our evidence to the Panel, a small number of statements were not included by the supplier in the first release of organisation- wide data that was disseminated across the organisation. These statements, whilst useful and

include additional information, are not included in the overall data sets from which the supplier derives the overall engagement factors and calculations. They were subsequently included in all of the data packs released by departments and cascaded to all staff.

Staff Turnover

Key Finding 39 (Not agreed)

There is a concerning level of staff turnover within the Government of Jersey. The severity of this is unclear, however a large proportion of employees have indicated in the Be Heard survey that they may be wishing to leave the Government of Jersey and this may impact succession planning or create a skill deficit

Recommendation 23 (Accepted)

The States Employment Board should ascertain and publish staff turnover by department as soon as possible, using tools such as enhanced exit interviews to identify any issues causing departures and remedying these issues as able.

There is no evidence that staff turnover is a concern. Turnover in 2021 is at the lowest level for a number of years. Around 15% of turnover is planned retirements, 12.6% as a result of the end of a fixed term contract, and 4% as a result of dismissals.

Removing the forced' turnover figures in 2020, the turnover rate is 6.4%.

We monitor turnover by key groups, and there are no concerns in the level of turnover in any key groups. This data can be published frequently.

The Be Heard question, referred to in Finding 39, references if people had another job to go to, not an intention to leave. This is an important factor as this particular question is correlated with likely drivers for retention or loss of employees. It is also a qualified question, which means under a particular circumstance people would leave. This does not lead to a conclusion that people are or will leave.

Team Jersey

Key Finding 40 (Not agreed)

The messaging around Team Jersey which focussed on get on the train or get left behind' has alienated employees, this position seemed to be maintained by the former Chief Executive upon his departure.

The Board understands that the Panel did not seek evidence from the programme Director or the supplier (TDP Jersey) on aspects of the Team Jersey commentary.

Upon reviewing the information that has led the Panel to this finding it is clear that the information in point 188 of the Panel's report has been taken out of context and has no connection with the core messaging or the narrative included in the programme. The message of the Programme has from 2019 focused on the 4 cornerstones of positive culture where people are: Valued, Included, Focused and Inspired. This is the message that has been shared with and experienced by over 3,000 employees who have engaged in the programme to date.

The finding is inaccurate in stating that people are alienated by the programme. The evidence in the Be Heard Survey, quoted in the report highlights a positive response score of 4.52 (meaning the majority were positive) from respondents who have seen a positive change from the Team Jersey Programme.

Key Finding 41 (Agreed)

It was identified in 2019 that key stakeholders, such as politicians, should be brought into the Team Jersey programme early as they were pivotal to its success. However, the Council of Ministers did not gain access to workshops until May 2021.

The Council of Ministers were engaged in the programme from the early stages and in 2019 were involved in a series of workshops to develop a bespoke programme for Ministers and Assistant Ministers. Unfortunately, the workshop programme due to commence in March 2020 was delayed along with all other workshops due to COVID and commenced in 2021, when face to face workshops became possible. The Council of Ministers have remained engaged in the programme throughout the period of its existence, receiving regular briefings on the progress of the programme.

Recommendation 24 (Rejected)

Moving forward, Team Jersey's contract should be halted and an alternative training programme introduced with a primarily purpose to build skills and ethos to combat the specified low morale within the Government of Jersey, as opposed to principally being used to highlight the "One Gov" benefits.

This recommendation fails to recognise that Team Jersey is neither a contract nor a training programme. It is a programme of workstreams, delivered by an internal team working alongside a delivery partner, TDP. The programme of development workshops available to all employees is only part of what is delivered, full details of which were provided to the Panel in the papers submitted. The purpose of the programmes is to build a positive culture where all employees feel valued, included, focused and inspired. They include skills development, coaching and consultancy to support departments to develop and implement plans to engage their employees. The report recommends that the current training is halted as it does not provide support in building skills and ethos to address low morale; this is inaccurate. The programme of training is highly relevant and successful. The focus on developing supportive managers and high performing teams has contributed to the strong responses in these areas in the BeHeard survey. Furthermore 91% of people attending the training score the programme as good or very good, with 89% recommending the training to colleagues.

In addition, the HR Lounge follow up report of February 2021, which the Panel have drawn on as evidence for their recommendations, clearly supports the work of Team Jersey in building the right behaviours in the organisation and combatting bullying and harassment. The Board would bring the Panel's attention to the recommendation in paragraph 207 of the HR Lounge report that states; You have done well with this programme and respect the work undertaken by Team Jersey. We think you should invest further in it and continue with what you have set in train.' To recommend the halting of this successful programme is unwise.

The contract with TDP Jersey continues until March 2022 however the majority of the delivery will have been handed over to the organisation's in-house team by December 2021. TDP have supported the organisation to build internal capacity and capability to allow the programme to continue beyond March 2022 as part of the People and Corporate Services business as usual delivery.

The programme extension for a further year was due to the impact of the COVID pandemic, which led to most aspects of the programme being paused for a period of 7 months. However, the extension was put in place to not only allow the original programme deliverables to be completed but to also provide department support to rebuild, following what has been a highly challenging period for all employees.

The work of Team Jersey supports departments to prioritise people and culture issues and help create action plans to address these. Its role is to do the very things the Panel have requested to be prioritised by providing support to departments:

• Respond to the outcomes of the BeHeard survey

• Embed the organisation values and behaviours

• Focus on the wellbeing support for employees

• Improving individual, team and organisational performance

• Prioritise diversity and inclusion

• Build capability and capacity in their teams

Engagement in the programme as at the 31st July 2021

Comments captured from the post session evaluations completed by leaders and employees who attended our workshops include:

• Great to feel I can express difficulties and explore ideas in a safe space. (Balancing challenging and supportive behaviours)

• I always leave these sessions motivated to try (high performing teams)

• I can tell which people in my team have attend this course I am now more aware in a positive way. (Crucial conversations)

• Truly learned a lot from this session which I will be taking into the workplace. (Diversity, inclusion and belonging)

From September 2021 Team Jersey will continue to run the existing programme content and the whole staff Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging' and will also be introducing new content that responds directly to the outcomes of the BeHeard survey and issues we have identified through our work. The new sessions include:

• Creating Psychological Safety in Teams (Leaders)

• Balancing Challenging and Supportive Behaviours (Leaders and Colleagues)

• The Power of Emotional Intelligence (all staff)

Other sessions in design due to be launched from November 2021.

• Wellbeing in the Workplace (All staff)

• Leader as Coach (Leaders)

Team Jersey Consultancy support to Departments

As part of the Programme extension Departments are receiving consultancy support from Team Jersey to support them to put in place People and Culture plans. Since April 2021:

• A total of 107 days support has been directly provided in departments

• 6 Departments have put in place people and culture plans and a further 4 departments are working on developing their plans. These plans respond to priority people and culture issues identified in the department. They cover a range of topics including leadership  and  management  development,  performance  management,  employee engagement, employee experience, diversity and inclusion.

• Team Jersey with Leaders in departments to set up and support employee working groups  they  can  work  with  to  deliver  change.  These  working  groups  allow  the employees voice to be heard and empower staff members to identify and deliver change.

• Team Jersey are currently working with 14 divisional leadership teams and have a further 9 booked to commence work at a department level to put plans in place to improve culture and engagement.

Types of work undertaken include:

• Development plans and coaching to support team development (Justice & Home Affairs)

• Support to develop and implement department wellbeing initiatives including supporting Children, Young People, Education & Skills to develop their strategy, supporting Health

& Community Services wellbeing week through the delivery of sessions, and attending Highland College inset week to deliver emotional intelligence sessions to over 140 staff members.

• Supporting the development of cross department working to improve outcomes for clients/customers (Children, Young People, Education & Skills/Health & Community Services regarding Children's mental health services)

• Supporting the development of workforce plans

• Helping Departments to create plans to respond to the BeHeard Survey

Jersey Employers Group

Team Jersey initiated the development of the Jersey Employer Group an independent body of over 60 leading employers that brings together representatives from all industries to help ensure that the Island workforce is prepared for the jobs of the future and the Island develops a reputation as a place which has a positive workplace culture.

The Jersey Employer Group supported by Team Jersey have:

• Published a strategic workforce plan for the Island

• Delivered a diversity and inclusion toolkit for employers

Jersey Employer Group continues to deliver under three workstreams:

• Building future Jersey talent including the development of career pathways across all sectors, mentoring, coaching and secondment opportunities in the Island

• Early careers and school's engagement working with Jersey employers and education providers to develop opportunities

• Diversity and inclusion to embed robust practices around diversity and inclusion

Appendix 1 - Table of responses to recommendations